Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 16:56:23 +0000
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>,
        linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        "Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/9] cxl/mem: Add a driver for the type-3 mailbox
Message-ID: <20201116165623.GA23268@infradead.org>
References: <20201111054356.793390-1-ben.widawsky@intel.com>
 <20201111054356.793390-4-ben.widawsky@intel.com>
 <20201111071231.GC7829@infradead.org>
 <CAPcyv4iA_hNc=xdcbR-eb57W9o4br1BognSr5Sj4pAO3uMm69g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4iA_hNc=xdcbR-eb57W9o4br1BognSr5Sj4pAO3uMm69g@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 09:17:37AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > +config CXL_MEM
> > > +        tristate "CXL.mem Device Support"
> > > +        depends on PCI && CXL_BUS_PROVIDER != n
> >
> > depend on PCI && CXL_BUS_PROVIDER
> >
> > > +        default m if CXL_BUS_PROVIDER
> >
> > Please don't set weird defaults for new code.  Especially not default
> > to module crap like this.
> 
> This goes back to what people like Dave C. asked for LIBNVDIMM / DAX,
> a way to blanket turn on a subsystem without needing to go hunt down
> individual configs.

Then at least do a

   default CXL_BUS_PROVIDER

but we really don't do this elsewhere.  E.g. we don't default the scsi
disk driver on if there is some host adapter selected.


> > > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Intel Corporation");
> >
> > A module author is not a company.
> 
> At least I don't have a copyright assignment clause, I don't agree
> with the vanity of listing multiple people here especially when
> MAINTAINERS has the contact info, and I don't want to maintain a list
> as people do drive-by contributions and we need to figure out at what
> level of contribution mandates a new MODULE_AUTHOR line. Now, that
> said I would be ok to duplicate the MAINTAINERS as MODULE_AUTHOR
> lines, but I otherwise expect MAINTAINERS is the central source for
> module contact info.

IMHO MODULE_AUTHOR is completely pointless.  I haven't used for ~15
years.  Especially as the concept that a module has a single author
is a rather strange one.