Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754134Ab2JFVSr (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Oct 2012 17:18:47 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51460 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752031Ab2JFVSp (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Oct 2012 17:18:45 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 23:18:27 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina To: Jean Delvare Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?St=E9phane_Chatty?= , "benjamin.tissoires" , Dmitry Torokhov , =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Fabien_Andr=E9?= , =?ISO-2022-JP?Q?=1B$BN-2E=3DY=1B=28J?= , Ben Dooks , Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, USB list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marcel Holtmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] i2c-hid: introduce HID over i2c specification implementation In-Reply-To: <20121006231111.6350c014@endymion.delvare> Message-ID: References: <1347630103-4105-1-git-send-email-benjamin.tissoires@gmail.com> <20121006220421.47f5fd56@endymion.delvare> <6F756B9E-DC87-4EF6-BB09-8A69A5F8C999@enac.fr> <20121006231111.6350c014@endymion.delvare> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1753 Lines: 40 On Sat, 6 Oct 2012, Jean Delvare wrote: > > The question is what drives the choice of where to put HID-over-XXX, among the following > > 1- who the maintainer is. Here, Benjamin will probably maintain this > > so it does not help. > > 2- dependencies. HID-over-XXX depends on HID as much as it depends on > > XXX, so it does not help. > > 3- data flow. Indeed, HID is a client of HID-over-XXX which is a > > client of XXX. Are there other parts of the kernel where this drives > > the choice of where YYY-over-XXX lives? > > > > Jiri, Marcel, Greg, others, any opinions? > > My vote is a clear 3. It took me a few years to kick all users (as > opposed to implementers) of i2c from drivers/i2c and finding them a > proper home, I'm not going to accept new intruders. Grouping drivers > according to what they implement makes it a lot easier to share code > and ideas between related drivers. If you want to convince yourself, > just imagine the mess it would be if all drivers for PCI devices lived > under drivers/pci. This is more or less consistent with my original opinion when I was refactoring the HID layer out of the individual drivers a few years ago. But Marcel objected that he wants to keep all the bluetooth-related drivers under net/bluetooth, and I didn't really want to push hard against this, because I don't have really super-strong personal preference either way. But we definitely can use this oportunity to bring this up for discussion again. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/