lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Use of drivers/platform and matching include?
    On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 09:48:41AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
    > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
    > <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
    > > On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 12:41:28PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
    > >>
    > >> So, no, there will be no new drivers under arch/arm. They must be in the
    > >> drivers subtree somewhere.
    > >
    > > I have no objection with this, and encourage it.
    >
    > Ok, so these are some of the requirements as far as I see it:
    >
    > * No per-vendor driver dumping ground under drivers/* (i.e. no
    > drivers/platform/<soc vendor>/)

    Yes.

    > * No weirdly constructed single-driver directories directly under
    > drivers/* (we already have a few and should look at moving those)
    > because nothing else fits

    Yes, we should see about moving some of the ones we currently have,
    drivers/ntb/ is one example that I couldn't think of a better place to
    put it. I guess drivers/misc/ really would be best for a bunch of
    these. As an example, drivers/misc/mic/ is way larger than
    drivers/ntb/.

    > * We need some sort of convention on dependencies. Several of these
    > are more libraries than drivers, i.e. we'll have cross-calls for
    > things like queue management, resource allocation, etc. So having a
    > single location to hold most of these makes sense instead of
    > everything cross-depending on everything else.

    What's wrong with lib/ for that? Isn't that supposed to be where this
    type of thing goes?

    > Based on the above, how about we create something like
    > drivers/resourcemgr to hold these? I think at least parts of the
    > mvebu-mbus driver that ended up under drivers/bus might be a fit to
    > move there. The APM queue allocator would likely be a fit, and maybe
    > some of the qualcomm stuff. Kumar, what are your thoughts on that?
    > Greg?

    lib/ does look "big", but we also have kernel/ for the current resource
    stuff, as it is core code. Why not use that?

    thanks,

    greg k-h


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-10-05 19:41    [W:2.541 / U:0.104 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site