netdev - Re: [RFC 43/72] a2065/ariadne: Move the a2065/ariadne drivers

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: <20110711113128.GA21187@infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jul 2011 07:31:28 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 43/72] a2065/ariadne: Move the a2065/ariadne drivers

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 02:39:57AM -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> It may just be me, these statements seem negative and bitter and is not
> helping us "solve" the issue.  While the statements may be true,  I
> would like to try and find a solution, what ever it may be, to better
> organize drivers/net/ethernet/ drivers to help with maintenance and
> future development.

It would help what the whole point of shuffling these drivers around
in arbitrary ways is.  Splitting them up for the actual protocols might
make some sense, as would giving a subdirectory to every non-trivial
driver.  But what whole vendor split, even if consistently implemented
seems like a lot of wanking for very little juice.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html