From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 15:45:10 +0100 Subject: [RFC v3 01/19] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core In-Reply-To: References: <20181128193636.254378-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181128193636.254378-2-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181130031438.GQ4922@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com> Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <20181205144510.MXCrH7tSaF0Ot9zAYS_yxrFYpacrTsQsmFrV-u9DJYQ@z> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:42 PM Anton Ivanov wrote: > On 30/11/2018 03:14, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018@11:36:18AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > Then for the UML stuff, I think if we *really* accept that UML will > > always be a viable option we should probably consider now throwing these > > things under drivers/platform/uml/. This follows the pattern of arch > > specific drivers. Whether or not we end up with a complete userspace > > UML platform drivers predate that and are under arch/um/drivers/ > > We should either keep to current convention or consider relocating the > existing ones - having things spread in different places around the tree > is not good in the long run (UML already has a few of those under the > x86 tree, let's not increase the number). I don't mind the current location much, but if we move drivers, we should move the into the appropriate subsystems based on what they do, rather than having a new place with a mix of things. E.g. the tty drivers should all be in drivers/tty/ and the network drivers in drivers/net. To paraphrase what you said above: having tty drivers spread in different places around the tree is not good in the long run. We have long ago moved from organizing drivers by bus interface to organizing drivers by class, uml and drivers/platform are just exceptions to this rule. Arnd