On Wednesday 04 January 2012, Greg KH wrote: > > > > My thinking was that having a drivers/tty/serial dir and then > > not having all the serial drivers in that dir violated the > > principle of least surprise. Is there a reason why the dir should > > be the exclusive domain of drivers with a dependency on SERIAL_CORE? > > Because that is what the directory is for? :) > > We have other "serial" like drivers all over the kernel, this was for > the SERIAL_CORE drivers only at the moment. My initial plan when moving some files to drivers/tty was to have a separate directory for the non-SERIAL_CORE serial drivers next to drivers/tty/serial. I would still prefer this solution, but I think we never agreed on a good name for that directory. IIRC, I had suggested drivers/tty/legacy believing that SERIAL_CORE was the modern way to implement a serial driver, but that turned out not to be true and at lease one of these (bfin_jtag) is not a legacy driver in practice. Maybe drivers/tty/hw? I think that one has been suggested before, too. I don't remember any argument against it and I think it would be nice to separate the core implementation from actual device drivers. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
