From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg KH)
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 09:03:43 +0200
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/15] acrn: add the ACRN driver module
In-Reply-To: <20190816063925.GB18980@zn.tnic>
References: <1565922356-4488-1-git-send-email-yakui.zhao@intel.com>
 <20190816063925.GB18980@zn.tnic>
Message-ID: <20190816070343.GA1368@kroah.com>
List-Id: Linux Driver Project Developer List
 <driverdev-devel.linuxdriverproject.org>

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019@08:39:25AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019@10:25:41AM +0800, Zhao Yakui wrote:
> > The first three patches are the changes under x86/acrn, which adds the
> > required APIs for the driver and reports the X2APIC caps. 
> > The remaining patches add the ACRN driver module, which accepts the ioctl
> > from user-space and then communicate with the low-level ACRN hypervisor
> > by using hypercall.
> 
> I have a problem with that: you're adding interfaces to arch/x86/ and
> its users go into staging. Why? Why not directly put the driver where
> it belongs, clean it up properly and submit it like everything else is
> submitted?
> 
> I don't want to have stuff in arch/x86/ which is used solely by code in
> staging and the latter is lingering there indefinitely because no one is
> cleaning it up...

I agree, stuff in drivers/staging/ must be self-contained, with no
changes outside of the code's subdirectory needed in order for it to
work.  That way it is trivial for us to delete it when it never gets
cleaned up :)

You never say _why_ this should go into drivers/staging/, nor do you
have a TODO file like all other staging code that explains exactly what
needs to be done to get it out of there.

thanks,

greg k-h