linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/14] docs: add bus-virt-phys-mapping.txt to core-api

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200522062225.6f73d811@coco.lan>
Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 06:22:25 +0200
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] docs: add bus-virt-phys-mapping.txt to core-api

Em Fri, 15 May 2020 11:53:21 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:

> On Fri,  1 May 2020 17:37:46 +0200
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > This describes an old interface used prior the new DMA-API
> > interfaces. Add it to the core-api guide, just after the
> > DMA stuff.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  .../bus-virt-phys-mapping.rst}                                   | 0
> >  Documentation/core-api/index.rst                                 | 1 +
> >  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >  rename Documentation/{bus-virt-phys-mapping.txt => core-api/bus-virt-phys-mapping.rst} (100%)  
> 
> For this one, I think we should maybe just delete the file.  It contains a
> warning from *20 years ago* saying not to use it, and talks about
> functions like isa_readl() that haven't existed i the kernel for some
> time.  Is there any reason to keep dragging it around?

Except for "keeping it for historical reasons" (as mentioned at the
file), I don't see any reason why to keep it.

It might be useful if someone wants to port some OOT code based on
a legacy kernel.

Yet, if you prefer to just trash it, I'm ok with that.

Thanks,
Mauro