On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:51:22AM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 06:14:56AM -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > USB Attached SCSI is a new protocol specified jointly by the SCSI T10 > > committee and the USB Implementors Forum. > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > MAINTAINERS | 8 + > > drivers/usb/storage/Kconfig | 13 + > > drivers/usb/storage/Makefile | 1 + > > drivers/usb/storage/uas.c | 751 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 4 files changed, 773 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 drivers/usb/storage/uas.c > > Given that this is distinctly not usb-storage, and it is entirely contained > within a single file, does it really belong in the drivers/usb/storage > directory? > > That just seems like a plan for confusion. The fact that there is a big > "this is not usb-storage" message in the comments of uas.c would seem to > support this position. > > Given that it is a single file, I would put it in drivers/usb directly. If > you wanted your own directory for possible future refactoring into multiple > files or addid other files (like usb-storage did to support oddball > devices), then maybe create a drivers/usb/uas directory. What about drivers/usb/class/ where a number of other USB class drivers live. That would make more sense, right? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
