Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:03:16 -0700 | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging) |
| |
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:39:42 -0400 Parag Warudkar wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 7:00 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > > So, does this all look good to everyone? Any questions/issues? > > > > I sure hope this does not end up like EXPERIMENTAL although it > essentially does duplicate the intent of EXPERIMENTAL. > (In other words - drivers live there for ever in staging mode, we > print warnings and generally nobody cares about the problem since the > kernel is tainted.) > > That aside please at least substitute the word CRAP with something > better - like TAINT_NON_PRODUCTION or TAINT_UNRELIABLE or > TAINT_WORK_IN_PROGRESS or TAINT_EXPERIMENTAL . Arguably > TAINT_EXPERIMENTAL could also be used for known broken > CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL items. It might also be better to change the > staging directory name to non-production or experimental - but that's > just my preference. > > Also, I suppose it would be useful for Production machines to have a > kernel command line flag or something to say don't load staging > modules - for instance to prevent against automatic loading on drivers > from staging directory to support some oddball device etc. > > Thinking more about it - could this whole thing not be achieved by > setting per module experimental flag and refusing to insmod'ing > experimental modules if -f was not specified. I believe force loading > also taints the kernel? All drivers intended for staging can set that > flag - this way we don't need another TAINT flag and there is no need > for the directory name hack.
Thanks. I agree with Parag's comments.
Looks like overkill/duplication.
--- ~Randy
| |