From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757859Ab2J3PsI (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:48:08 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:42285 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753228Ab2J3PsF (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:48:05 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:48:01 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: George Zhang , pv-drivers@vmware.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 00/12] VMCI for Linux upstreaming Message-ID: <20121030154801.GC14167@kroah.com> References: <20121030005923.17788.21797.stgit@promb-2n-dhcp175.eng.vmware.com> <20121030021938.GC1920@kroah.com> <20121030040744.GB32055@dtor-ws.eng.vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121030040744.GB32055@dtor-ws.eng.vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 09:07:44PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 07:19:38PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:03:28PM -0700, George Zhang wrote: > > > drivers/misc/Kconfig | 1 > > > drivers/misc/Makefile | 2 > > > drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/Kconfig | 16 > > > drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/Makefile | 43 > > > > Meta comment here, why drivers/misc/? The other hypervisor > > infrastructures all have their own directory under drivers/ Should we > > be moving everything to drivers/hyperv/ somehow? > > drivers/hyperv is not the best name for obvious reasons... Sorry, yes :) > I think that even if we had a special directory for vmci having network > drivers in Dave's realm and pvscsi in James's is best option, so the new > directory would contain vmci and the balloon driver (vsock will go into > net/). Given that balloon is already in drivers/misc it looked like > obvious place for VMCI as well. I agree that the individual drivers should go in the subsystem area, it's this "hypervisor bus core" type code that I'm questioning. Right now every hypervisor is putting that logic in a different place in the kernel, having some consistency here would be nice. thanks, greg k-h