Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:05:27 +0100 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: RFC: rename arch/arm/mach-s3c2410 to arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx |
| |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 01:01:16PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: > Ben Dooks wrote: > > With the advent of the s3c2410 port adding support for > > more of the samsung SoC product line (s3c2440, s3c2442, > > s3c2400) there have been several requests by other people > > to rename the (in their opinion) increasingly inaccurate > > arch/arm/mach-s3c2410 to arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx. > > Also, I've always found the dichotomy of having > "include/asm-arm/arch-s3c2410" and "arch/arm/mach-s3c2410" rather weird.
There's a reason for this (this has actually been covered and discussed at length in the past on the linux-arm mailing lists.)
Folk convinced me that the only thing which we should call "architecture" is the CPU - so things like "PPC", "ARM", "i386" are architectures, and not implementations of these (AT91RM9200, S3C2410).
The things in arch/arm/mach* are machine classes which support a variety of machines which are all essentially similar. Inside these directories you have the core support for the individual machines.
However, the problem is that we can't rename include/asm-arm/arch-* to include/asm-arm/mach-*, because we need a symlink to select the right one. If we renamed include/asm-arm/arch-* to include/asm-arm/mach-*, we'd want the symlink to be called include/asm-arm/mach.
Unfortunately, we have an include/asm-arm/mach directory, so we'd end up having to symlink include/asm-arm/mach-* to include/asm-arm/arch. This would be even more confusing than leaving the include/asm-arm as currently is.
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |