From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: tracking MAINTAINERS versus tracking SUBSYSTEMS
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:35:33 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708181311490.10387@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
this latest project of cramming the full definition of each kernel
subsystem into the MAINTAINERS file has been bothering me, and i've
finally figured out why. it's because the MAINTAINERS file is being
asked to now be the source of reference information that just doesn't
match its name. it's the "MAINTAINERS" file so it seems that all it
should be keeping track of is the maintainer of each subsystem, and
that's all.
what people are clearly after is a way to match any part of the
kernel source to a subsystem and, henceforth, to a maintainer, but
there's nothing that says all of that has to be crammed into *that*
file.
why not add a new script to the kernel source tree that, given a
file or directory name as an argument, returns its corresponding
"subsystem" that can be cross-referenced against the MAINTAINERS file?
something like:
$ show_subsystem drivers/bluetooth/bpa10x.c
BLUETOOTH
there would seem to be a number of advantages to this approach:
1) it reduces the MAINTAINERS file back to what it should be in the
first place -- a simple reference list of each kernel subsystem, and
who's responsible for it, so that constant reshuffling of files or
directories in a particular subsystem doesn't require constant
updating of the MAINTAINERS file.
2) you could extend the show_subsystem() routine to, once it found the
subsystem, quickly cross-reference the MAINTAINERS file and print out
the corresponding maintainer. i believe the word "trivial" applies
here.
3) by making this a feature separate from the MAINTAINERS file, it can
be mocked up and hacked separately and finally patched in when it's
ready to go, rather than applying 5 bazillion patches to the poor
MAINTAINERS file.
4) finally, a feature like this could be used as a sanity check on the
kernel subsystem structure. every once in a while, it could be
invoked for every single file and directory in the tree, just to see
if all of those appear to belong to at least one subsystem. if not,
print a warning: "Whoa, file /fubar/snafu doesn't belong to a
subsystem. Deal with it."
the actual implementation would seem to be easy -- perhaps a simple
text file that defines each subsystem and every file and directory
that's part of it:
FIREWIRE:drivers/firewire/,include/linux/firewire.h,... etc ...
i mean, it doesn't get a whole lot simpler than that, and it would
seem to be *way* easier to read.
thoughts?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
next reply other threads:[~2007-08-18 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-18 17:35 Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2007-08-19 0:32 ` Joe Perches
2007-08-19 12:22 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-19 15:37 ` Joe Perches
2007-08-19 20:10 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2007-08-20 19:31 ` Chris Snook
2007-08-20 19:46 ` Joe Perches
2007-08-21 19:22 ` Chris Snook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0708181311490.10387@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rpjday@mindspring.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®