linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v3 01/19] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 5 Dec 2018 14:49:10 +0000
From:   Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Lawrence Brakmo <brakmo@...com>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        knut.omang@...cle.com,
        Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
        "Bird, Timothy" <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>, linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, levinsasha928@...il.com,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 01/19] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core

On 05/12/2018 14:45, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:42 PM Anton Ivanov
> <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com> wrote:
>> On 30/11/2018 03:14, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:18AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
>>> Then for the UML stuff, I think if we *really* accept that UML will
>>> always be a viable option we should probably consider now throwing these
>>> things under drivers/platform/uml/. This follows the pattern of arch
>>> specific drivers. Whether or not we end up with a complete userspace
>> UML platform drivers predate that and are under arch/um/drivers/
>>
>> We should either keep to current convention or consider relocating the
>> existing ones - having things spread in different places around the tree
>> is not good in the long run (UML already has a few of those under the
>> x86 tree, let's not increase the number).
> I don't mind the current location much, but if we move drivers, we should
> move the into the appropriate subsystems based on what they do, rather
> than having a new place with a mix of things.
>
> E.g. the tty drivers should all be in drivers/tty/ and the network drivers in
> drivers/net. To paraphrase what you said above: having tty drivers spread in
> different places around the tree is not good in the long run. We have long
> ago moved from organizing drivers by bus interface to organizing drivers
> by class, uml and drivers/platform are just exceptions to this rule.

There are some issues with that because uml drivers have bits of what is 
effectively host side of the hypervisor as a part of them. IMHO, having 
that in driver/X is not very appropriate. So at least the *_user.c and 
*_user.h bits have to go (or stay) somewhere else

Brgds,

-- 
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661