linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Kselftest update for Linux 5.4-rc1

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]

Message-ID: <20190924080715.GA63699@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Sep 2019 10:07:15 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Tim.Bird@...y.com
Cc:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, brendanhiggins@...gle.com,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org, broonie@...nel.org,
        jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com, anders.roxell@...aro.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Kselftest update for Linux 5.4-rc1


* Tim.Bird@...y.com <Tim.Bird@...y.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ingo Molnar on Sunday, September 22, 2019 1:26 AM
> > 
> > * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 9:35 AM Brendan Higgins
> > > <brendanhiggins@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Sorry about that. I am surprised that none of the other reviewers
> > > > brought this up.
> > >
> > > I think I'm "special".
> > >
> > > There was some other similar change a few years ago, which I
> > > absolutely hated because of how it broke autocomplete for me. Very few
> > > other people seemed to react to it.
> > 
> > FWIW, I am obsessively sensitive to autocomplete and overall source code
> > file hieararchy and nomenclature details as well, so it's not just you.
> > 
> > Beyond the muscle memory aspect, nonsensical naming and inanely flat file
> > hierarchies annoy kernel developers and makes it harder for newbies to
> > understand the kernel source as well.
> > 
> > The less clutter, the more organization, the better - and there's very
> > few valid technical reasons to add any new files or directories to the
> > top level directory - we should probably *remove* quite a few.
> > 
> > For example 'firmware/' was recently moved to drivers/firmware/, and in a
> > similar fashion about a third of the remaining 22 directories should
> > probably be moved too:
> > 
> >   drwxr-xr-x    arch
> >   drwxr-xr-x    block
> >   drwxr-xr-x    certs           # move to build/certs/ dir
> >   drwxr-xr-x    crypto          # move to kernel/crypto/ or security/crypto/
> >   drwxr-xr-x    Documentation
> >   drwxr-xr-x    drivers
> >   drwxr-xr-x    fs
> >   drwxr-xr-x    include
> >   drwxr-xr-x    init
> >   drwxr-xr-x    ipc             # move to kernel/ipc/
> >   drwxr-xr-x    kernel
> >   drwxr-xr-x    lib
> >   drwxr-xr-x    LICENSES
> >   drwxr-xr-x    mm
> >   drwxr-xr-x    net
> >   drwxr-xr-x    samples         # move to Documentation/samples/
> >   drwxr-xr-x    scripts         # move to build/scripts/
> 
> This one seems like it would break a lot of workflows, and contributor
> muscle memory and scripts.  get_maintainer.pl and checkpatch.pl
> are probably in quite a few people's scripts.
> 
> Also, I'm not sure '/build' is the right destination for this.  There
> are a lot more things in there than just build scripts.  If you really
> want to remove the top level 'scripts', it might be best to put
> the  scripts from top-level '/scripts' into '/tools/scripts', which is
> mostly empty now.

Agreed - I'll leave it alone for now, because you are right that it's 
widely used.

Thanks,

	Ingo