From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add i2c tree for embedded platforms Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:25:15 +0100 Message-ID: <20100126162515.230bdf36@hyperion.delvare> References: <1264411234-5400-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20100125111055.05ccedf2@hyperion.delvare> <20100126143830.GC12774@fluff.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100126143830.GC12774@fluff.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Cc: Uwe Kleine-Koenig , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Dooks List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:38:30 +0000, Ben Dooks wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:10:55AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:20:34 +0100, Uwe Kleine-K??nig wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-K??nig > > > Cc: Ben Dooks > > > --- > > > Hello, > > > > > > I wonder if it makes sence to split the "I2C SUBSYSTEM" entry into > > > something like: > > > > > > I2C SUBSYSTEM (PC drivers, core) > > > M: Jean Delvare > > > L: ... > > > W: ... > > > T: quilt ... > > > S: ... > > > F: Documentation/i2c/ > > > F: drivers/i2c/ > > > F: include/linux/i2c.h > > > F: include/linux/i2c-*.h > > > > > > I2C SUBSYSTEM (embedded platforms) > > > M: Ben Dooks > > > L: ... > > > W: ... > > > T: git ... > > > S: ... > > > F: drivers/i2c/ > > > F: include/linux/i2c-*.h > > > > > > (I'm not entirely sure about the file patterns for the 2nd entry.) > > > > I'm not sure what value it adds, compared to having a single entry as > > we have today. scripts/get_maintainer.pl will produce the same output, > > won't it? > > > > This script (and our minds) being directory-driven, I suspect that the > > only efficient way to split the entries would be to first move all i2c bus > > driver for embedded platforms to a separate subdirectory. I'm leaving > > it to Ben and the embedded community to decide whether they want to do > > that or not. > > I'd much prefer to see just the one directory of i2c drivers, the > minor point being people silly enough to load modules by explicit path Never thought of that, but I wouldn't care. There is no good reason to do this. > and the second is that having all the drivers in one place makes it > easier to update them when changing something in the core... This doesn't seem to be a blocker either. For one thing, i2c subsystem-wide changes tend to affect chip drivers more than bus drivers. And even then, looking for drivers in 2 directories doesn't seem much harder than looking into just one, especially when said 2 directories live next to each other. So I see no objection to a mass move of all embedded/system i2c bus drivers to a separate sub-directory. -- Jean Delvare