From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/15] dec netdev: relocate DIGITAL based drivers to legacy Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 22:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20101028.225326.183057622.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20101028.212939.189691515.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: macro@linux-mips.org Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:45243 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751777Ab0J2FxD (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2010 01:53:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:46:13 +0100 (BST) > This would be no different to what we do wrt network protocols under > net/, so drivers would go to ethernet/, fasteth/, gbeth/, 10gbeth/, fddi/, > tokenring/, atm/, appletalk/, etc. (names up to debate if need be) as > applicable. This would scale well, avoid the need for arbitrary decisions > (is this piece legacy yet or not?) and automatically classify drivers as > more or less obsolescent too, as obviously none of the stuff under > ethernet/, fddi/ or tokenring/ can be reasonably recent unlike 10gbeth/. Why are you so hung up about something being called legacy? I would be proud to be labelled "legacy", as that means I've served a purpose for a long time and some folks even want or need me to stick around for a bit longer. Legacy hardware is just old and the drivers for them are in a purely "sustaining" state, that is all. And using link layer technology to classify is really stupid since many devices match multiple of the categories you've suggested. I think the existing proposal is just fine.