linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/27] Add support for OpenCAPI Persistent Memory devices

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:   Tue, 25 Feb 2020 16:32:31 -0800
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     "Alastair D'Silva" <alastair@....ibm.com>
Cc:     "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@...il.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Frederic Barrat <fbarrat@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Donnellan <ajd@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Anton Blanchard <anton@...abs.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org>,
        Anju T Sudhakar <anju@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Greg Kurz <groug@...d.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/27] Add support for OpenCAPI Persistent Memory devices

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:14 PM Alastair D'Silva <alastair@....ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-02-24 at 17:51 +1100, Oliver O'Halloran wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 3:43 PM Alastair D'Silva <
> > alastair@....ibm.com> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2020-02-23 at 20:37 -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 03:34:07PM +1100, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> > > > > V3:
> > > > >   - Rebase against next/next-20200220
> > > > >   - Move driver to arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv, we now
> > > > > expect
> > > > > this
> > > > >     driver to go upstream via the powerpc tree
> > > >
> > > > That's rather the opposite direction of normal; mostly drivers
> > > > live
> > > > under
> > > > drivers/ and not in arch/.  It's easier for drivers to get
> > > > overlooked
> > > > when doing tree-wide changes if they're hiding.
> > >
> > > This is true, however, given that it was not all that desirable to
> > > have
> > > it under drivers/nvdimm, it's sister driver (for the same hardware)
> > > is
> > > also under arch, and that we don't expect this driver to be used on
> > > any
> > > platform other than powernv, we think this was the most reasonable
> > > place to put it.
> >
> > Historically powernv specific platform drivers go in their respective
> > subsystem trees rather than in arch/ and I'd prefer we kept it that
> > way. When I added the papr_scm driver I put it in the pseries
> > platform
> > directory because most of the pseries paravirt code lives there for
> > some reason; I don't know why. Luckily for me that followed the same
> > model that Dan used when he put the NFIT driver in drivers/acpi/ and
> > the libnvdimm core in drivers/nvdimm/ so we didn't have anything to
> > argue about. However, as Matthew pointed out, it is at odds with how
> > most subsystems operate. Is there any particular reason we're doing
> > things this way or should we think about moving libnvdimm users to
> > drivers/nvdimm/?
> >
> > Oliver
>
>
> I'm not too fussed where it ends up, as long as it ends up somewhere :)
>
> From what I can tell, the issue is that we have both "infrastructure"
> drivers, and end-device drivers. To me, it feels like drivers/nvdimm
> should contain both, and I think this feels like the right approach.
>
> I could move it back to drivers/nvdimm/ocxl, but I felt that it was
> only tolerated there, not desired. This could be cleared up with a
> response from Dan Williams, and if it is indeed dersired, this is my
> preferred location.

Apologies if I gave the impression it was only tolerated. I'm ok with
drivers/nvdimm/ocxl/, and to the larger point I'd also be ok with a
drivers/{acpi => nvdimm}/nfit and {arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries =>
drivers/nvdimm}/papr_scm.c move as well to keep all the consumers of
the nvdimm related code together with the core.