Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 21 Aug 2000 23:09:26 +0100 | From | Philipp Rumpf <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Re: Move of input drivers, some word needed from you |
| |
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 02:01:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 21 Aug 2000, Philipp Rumpf wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 12:02:03PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I think what might be saving us right now is that there is only one widely-used > > bus architecture (PCI and it's derivatives/predecessors), so no-one is going to > > implement conflicting new features in both parts of a split driver. > > And this is not going to change. Everything but PCI is dead, and there > isn't going to be multiple different buses. Sure, we'll have some serial > new-generation stuff, and we'll continue to have things like USB, but I'm > not worried about having the same chip on different buses. It' > s a thing of the past.
Possible. It's also possible people will go back to having many protocols, if only because it's just another few K of firmware ROM on the device side and the fibre connection is physically identical.
> > I don't think "there aren't going to be a great many file in this directory" > > is really a good argument against creating a directory, except for the very > > special case that there would be no files at all in it. > > I think you're wrong. > > Logical naming and hierarchy are only helpers. If they lead to people > finding the files more quickly and understanding them better, they are > doing their job.
> If hierarchy leads to having to look more places, think about it more, and
According to my proposal, we would end up having all network drivers in drivers/*/net/*.
Currently we have arch/*/drivers/net/*, drivers/net/*, drivers/net/*/*, and drivers/*/net/*. > just more work, that hierarchy is BAD. It doesn't matter if it is logical > or not. It sucks. It just ends up being in your way.
I agree with the general statement. I also think it applies to the current hierarchy more strongly than to the proposed new hierarchy. The current hierarchy isn't logical, but it also doesn't give you a low number of places to look in for drivers. My opinion about the next point should be pretty obvious, and I do believe it is getting in the way of people actually trying to read some drivers.
> We could create a subdirectory for each driver. In some cases we _do_ > that (tulip and ide come to mind). But in the end, it should be done only > when it clarifies things, not just because somebody thinks it "ought" to > be that way.
Just to avoid misunderstandments, I never proposed creating a directory for each driver. I agree it's a bad idea.
> And "there aren't going to be many files in this directory" is an argument > against it. It means that the directory doesn't end up clarifying things > very much at all.
I would say drivers/s390/net and drivers/s390/misc are good directories. They clarify things. Most people just couldn't care less for them, and those people can safely ignore all of drivers/s390. Most people don't care for sbus, acorn, or sgi, either. some weird embedded people don't care about PCI. Most people don't care about weird embedded people's devices.
Philipp - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |