Re: [PATCH] scsi: target/sbp: remove firewire SBP target driver

2020-06-16 Thread Chris Boot
On 16/06/2020 16:34, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 14:13 +, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> On 16/06/2020 16:09, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 2020-06-16 02:42, Finn Thain wrote:
>>>> Martin said, "I'd appreciate a patch to remove it"
>>>>
>>>> And Bart said, "do you want to keep this driver in the kernel
>>>> tree?"
>>>>
>>>> AFAICT both comments are quite ambiguous. I don't see an
>>>> actionable request, just an expression of interest from people
>>>> doing their jobs.
>>>>
>>>> Note well: there is no pay check associated with having a
>>>> MAINTAINERS file 
>>>> entry.
>>>
>>> Hi Finn,
>>>
>>> As far as I know the sbp driver only has had one user ever and that
>>> user is no longer user the sbp driver. So why to keep it in the
>>> kernel tree? Restoring a kernel driver can be easy - the first step
>>> is a "git revert".
>>
>> Why not move the driver to drivers/staging for 2 or 3 kernel releases
>> and if noone steps up, delete it?
> 
> Because that's pretty much the worst of all worlds: If the driver is
> simply going orphaned it can stay where it is to avoid confusion.  If
> it's being removed, it's better to remove it from where it is because
> that makes the patch to restore it easy to find.
> 
> Chris, the thing is this: if this driver has just one user on a stable
> distro who complains about its removal six months to two years from
> now, Linus will descend on us from a great height (which won't matter
> to you, since you'll be long gone).  This makes everyone very wary of
> outright removal.  If you're really, really sure it has no users, it
> can be deleted, but if there's the slightest chance it has just one, it
> should get orphaned.

My patch to delete the driver was based on Martin's original request:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/yq1img99d4k@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com/

I don't especially want it to be gone, nor can I be sure there are no
users of what is as far as I can tell a working piece of code. I can
tell you that I never hear about it (other than the odd patch), whereas
I do get emails out of the blue for some of my other (much smaller)
stuff which clearly has users. I'd be just as happy for this to be
orphaned or for nothing to happen to it.

Honestly, I am totally ambivalent as to what happens to this code.
Martin, however, clearly cares enough to have asked me to supply a patch
to remove it.

Cheers,
Chris

-- 
Chris Boot
bo...@boo.tc


Re: [PATCH] scsi: target/sbp: remove firewire SBP target driver

2020-06-15 Thread Chris Boot
On 15/06/2020 00:28, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> 
>> I expect that if someone finds this useful it can stick around (but 
>> that's not my call).
> 
> Who's call is that? If the patch had said "From: Martin K. Petersen" and 
> "This driver is being removed because it has the following defects..." 
> that would be some indication of a good-faith willingness to accept users 
> as developers in the spirit of the GPL, which is what you seem to be 
> alluding to (?).

If you're asking me, I'd say it was martin's call:

> SCSI TARGET SUBSYSTEM 
>  
> M:  "Martin K. Petersen"  
>  
[...]
> F:  drivers/target/   
>  
> F:  include/target/   
>  

>> I just don't have the time or inclination or hardware to be able to 
>> maintain it anymore, so someone else would have to pick it up.
>>
> 
> Which is why most drivers get orphaned, right?

Sure, but that's not what Martin asked me to do, hence this patch.

-- 
Chris Boot
bo...@boo.tc


Re: [PATCH] scsi: target/sbp: remove firewire SBP target driver

2020-06-14 Thread Chris Boot
On 14/06/2020 01:03, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> 
>> I no longer have the time to maintain this subsystem nor the hardware to
>> test patches with. 
> 
> Then why not patch MAINTAINERS, and orphan it, as per usual practice?
> 
> $ git log --oneline MAINTAINERS | grep -i orphan

My patch to remove it was in response to:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/yq1img99d4k@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com/

>> It also doesn't appear to have any active users so I doubt anyone will 
>> miss it.
>>
> 
> It's not unusual that any Linux driver written more than 5 years ago 
> "doesn't appear to have any active users".
> 
> If a driver has been orphaned and broken in the past, and no-one stepped 
> up to fix it within a reasonable period, removal would make sense. But 
> that's not the case here.
> 
> I haven't used this driver for a long time, but I still own PowerMacs with 
> firewire, and I know I'm not the only one.

I expect that if someone finds this useful it can stick around (but
that's not my call). I just don't have the time or inclination or
hardware to be able to maintain it anymore, so someone else would have
to pick it up.

Cheers,
Chris

-- 
Chris Boot
bo...@boo.tc