From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Shishkin Subject: Re: [PATCH v0 01/11] stm class: Introduce an abstraction for System Trace Module devices Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 16:23:07 +0200 Message-ID: <877fuddq2c.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1425728161-164217-1-git-send-email-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> <1425728161-164217-2-git-send-email-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> <87mw3bewq8.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Mathieu Poirier Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Pratik Patel , peter.lachner-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, norbert.schulz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, keven.boell-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, yann.fouassier-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, laurent.fert-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Mathieu Poirier writes: > I forgot to mention in my previous email... I think the hierarchy of > our respective tracing module along with the generic-stm probably > needs a review. > > Currently we have drivers/coresight, drivers/intel_th and drivers/stm. > > To me it doesn't scale - what happens when other architectures come > out with their own hw tracing technologies? > > I suggest we move everything under drivers/hwtracing and as such have: > > drivers/hwtracing > drivers/hwtracing/intel_ht > drivers/hwtracing/coresight > drivers/hwtracing/stm > > That way other architectures can add drivers for their own hw tracing > technology without further polluting the drivers/ directory and > concentrating everything in the same area. What's your view on that? I wanted to suggest something similar, actually, if you don't mind moving drivers/coresight, then let's do it. Regards, -- Alex