From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] ACPICA: move common private headers under kernel/acpi/acpica/ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 11:03:04 -0500 Message-ID: <20090108160304.GA30619@infradead.org> References: <526647e1bb69fd3248558fce365bb1fbfb226ccd.1230719795.git.len.brown@intel.com> <20090102191451.GB14249@elte.hu> <20090107221017.GD17917@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:43438 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751356AbZAHQDL (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2009 11:03:11 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090107221017.GD17917@elte.hu> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 11:10:17PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > i still tend to regard kernel/* as the core Linux kernel, as code that can > be improved infinitely (only subject to the laws of physics), without > having to worry about how the ACPI spec wants certain things done. > > The moment you bring in "this has to work on BSD, etc." arguments it will > be a never ending excuse for crap. Standards tend to create the _worst_ > possible code, because every vendor compromizes a bit on another vendor's > crap, just to be able to get in their own important crap. So the more > vendors there are in a standards group, the crappier the end result is > technically. > > Also, ACPI is an environment/bootstrap detail well placed under > drivers/acpi/ - why should it move to kernel/acpi/ ? The fact that it's > used widely is immaterial - by that argument we could move arch/x86/ to > kernel/x86/, and we could move drivers/ata/ to kernel/ata/ as well. (they > are probably even more widely deployed than ACPI) I agree. acpi has no business under kernel/.