Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752595Ab3JERYB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 5 Oct 2013 13:24:01 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:43326 "EHLO
	mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752305Ab3JERX7 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 5 Oct 2013 13:23:59 -0400
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 10:13:23 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
        Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Use of drivers/platform and matching include?
Message-ID: <20131005171323.GB5780@kroah.com>
References: <BC1C47B3-5412-4829-A1D9-AAB04694D1CC@codeaurora.org>
 <CAOesGMjJ6Uj0uGFJqtnWQyDW+tr6eLVWoHZ+B7uFna+L8N6E8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131004114128.GL12758@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20131004132209.GB23923@kroah.com>
 <CAOesGMjxwmr0Vo0Puc-nZntgXLy6D1PTohz=C+fFukP_Eu1iQg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMjxwmr0Vo0Puc-nZntgXLy6D1PTohz=C+fFukP_Eu1iQg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2167
Lines: 54

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
--
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/