Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932790Ab1DNKcr (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:32:47 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:42128 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932666Ab1DNKcq (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:32:46 -0400 Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:32:00 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Jeremy Kerr , Nicolas Pitre , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Vincent Guittot , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Sascha Hauer , Paul Mundt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dima Zavin , Saravana Kannan , Ben Dooks , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Common struct clk implementation, v14 Message-ID: <20110414103200.GF1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1299134429.100626.661279191478.0.gpush@pororo> <1302754859.2767.30.camel@pororo> <20110414100048.GB1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1302776705.28876.113.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1302776705.28876.113.camel@pasglop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1742 Lines: 35 On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 08:25:05PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 11:00 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > I will take it, but at the moment I'm rather unhappy about the response > > from the community to Linus' complaint. > > > > If existing platform maintainers can show that moving over to this will > > result in a net reduction of code under arch/arm, then that will be good. > > What I don't want to see at the moment is arch/arm increasing in size as > > a result of any change. We desperately need to see a reduction for the > > next merge window. > > It's a chicken and egg... platform maintainers wait for you to take it > and you wait for them to take it :-) > > It seems to me that this fits well into the category of "better common > abstractions" that was discussed in the thread initiated by Linus as one > of the ways to improve on the "clutter"... That depends - sometimes creating generic stuff results in a net increase in the overall size, and that's something that Linus also complained about. According to linux-next, where we are at the moment with arch/arm is a net increase of 6000 lines since the close of the last merge window, and arch/arm is responsible for almost 75% of arch/ changes. It looks very much like the same situation which Linus complained about. Can arch/arm continue to increase in size? I think not. We desperately need patches which reduce the size of arch/arm, and we desperately need them *now*. -- 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/