lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [vmw_vmci 11/11] Apply the header code to make VMCI build


    ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    > To: "Andrew Stiegmann" <astiegmann@vmware.com>
    > Cc: "Sam Ravnborg" <sam@ravnborg.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
    > pv-drivers@vmware.com, vm-crosstalk@vmware.com, cschamp@vmware.com
    > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 11:16:39 AM
    > Subject: Re: [vmw_vmci 11/11] Apply the header code to make VMCI build
    >
    > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:20:43AM -0700, Andrew Stiegmann wrote:
    > > > The kernel style is to use lower_case for everything.
    > > > So this would become:
    > > >
    > > > vmci_device_get()
    > > >
    > > > This is obviously a very general comment and applies everywhere.
    > >
    > > I wish I could lower case these symbols but VMCI has already
    > > existed
    > > outside the mainline Linux tree for some time now and changing
    > > these
    > > exported symbols would mean that other drivers that depend on VMCI
    > > (vSock, vmhgfs) would need to change as well. One thought that
    > > did
    > > come to mind was exporting both VMCI_Device_Get and vmci_device_get
    > > but that would likely just confuse people. So in short I have made
    > > function names lower case where possible, but exported symbols
    > > could
    > > not be changed.
    >
    > Not true at all. You want those drivers to be merged as well, right?
    > So they will need to have their functions changed, and their code as
    > well.

    As previously mentioned VMware is working on upstreaming our vSock driver (one of a few drivers that uses vmw_vmci). However there are no plans to upstream the other drivers that depend on vmw_vmci. Because of this these symbols can not change.

    > Just wait until we get to the "change your functionality around"
    > requests, those will require those drivers to change. Right now we
    > are
    > at the "silly and obvious things you did wrong" stage of the review
    > process :)
    >
    > So please fix these, and also, post these drivers as well, so we can
    > see
    > how they interact with the core code.
    >
    > Actually, if you are going to need lots of refactoring for these
    > drivers, and the core, I would recommend putting this all in the
    > staging
    > tree, to allow that to happen over time. That would ensure that your
    > users keep having working systems, and let you modify the interfaces
    > better and easier, than having to keep it all out-of-tree.
    >
    > What do you think?

    We will discuss this internally and let you know.

    > greg k-h
    >


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-07-27 21:21    [W:0.031 / U:0.412 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site