From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764430AbZATAUU (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:20:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761861AbZATAMV (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:12:21 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:42905 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762889AbZATAMT (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:12:19 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:59:10 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: staging driver (epl) Message-ID: <20090119235910.GA7171@suse.de> References: <20090119210315.GA3805@x200.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090119210315.GA3805@x200.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:03:15AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > Greg, can I ssh to your box to do > > git rm -rf drivers/staging/epl > sed -i -e '/epl/d' drivers/staging/Kconfig > sed -i -e '/CONFIG_EPL/d' drivers/staging/Makefile > git commit -a -m 'staging: remove epl driver' > > ? That might be tough for you to do, as it's in every 2.6.29-rc1 release out there. That's a lot of ssh and sed commands needed for you to do :) > This driver doesn't meet even _the_ basic requirements. It meets the drivers/staging/ requirements of: - it builds - it is self-contained - someone is using it Well, some of the stuff in drivers/staging/ don't even meet the first requirement, making this one of the better drivers :) > It's _full_ of hungarian notation (iRet). > > It's full of typedefs. > > It's full of HAL (tEplApiInstance etc). > > Filenames (!) are in CamelCase. > > It creates sockets from kernel for something. > > It tries to interact with devfs. > > It may come as surprise but you also committed real Win32 code: > > drivers/staging/epl/EplTimeruWin32.c > drivers/staging/epl/ShbIpc-Win32.c > > Amazing, isn't it? No, not at all, I commited the tarball I was given, after shoehorning it into the kernel build system. > Do you accept _any_ code? Yes. > Exactly zero entry barrier? Pretty much. Know of any other drivers that should go into here that are floating around in the wild? Is this a problem? Is the drivers/staging/ area just not properly documented for people to understand what is going on there and how it differs from the rest of the kernel? Should I write up something a bit more "formal"? thanks, greg k-h