linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PULL] remove arch/h8300

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: <ca79546d-4e64-b8a-b63a-dfd0ebce8fed@linux-m68k.org>
Date:   Thu, 7 Apr 2022 18:34:15 +1000 (AEST)
From:   Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>
cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:H8/300 ARCHITECTURE" 
        <uclinux-h8-devel@...ts.sourceforge.jp>,
        "open list:TENSILICA XTENSA PORT (xtensa)" 
        <linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org>, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
        Linux-sh list <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
        Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PULL] remove arch/h8300

On Thu, 7 Apr 2022, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:

> On 4/7/22 09:17, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 11:25 PM Rob Landley wrote:
> > 
> >> I'm interested in H8300 because it's a tiny architecture (under 6k 
> >> lines total, in 93 files) and thus a good way to see what a minimal 
> >> Linux port looks like. If somebody would like to suggest a different 
> >> one for that...
> > 
> > Anything that is maintained is usually a better example, and it helps 
> > when the code is not old enough to have accumulated a lot of historic 
> > baggage.
> 
> But if it's not a lot of code, would it really accumulate a lot of 
> cruft?
> 

Where you see "TODO" in Documentation/features/*/*/arch-support.txt it may 
mean that an architecture is preventing the removal of an old API.

You're quite right, though, it is incorrect to call this an "accumulation" 
of baggage. It is actually the failure to remove cruft. (OTOH, shiny new 
things can be said to "accumulate". That's how cruft gets made.)