Use of drivers/platform and matching include?

[linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)]

On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 09:46:30AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> I don't have a good answer though. If it wasn't for the arm64 fork,
> locating these under arch/arm somewhere would really be the reasonable
> answer, like we used to do on powerpc. :(

Are you seriously suggesting going back to having drivers under arch/arm
because we can't find a home for them in the drivers subtree?

Having made a big thing about things as small as clock source drivers,
IRQ drivers and such like which "shouldn't be under arch/arm" and moving
them out, to then say about finding somewhere under arch/arm for drivers
is very much a case of double-standards.

I've heard this accusation that we have too many drivers in arch/arm
many times, and although we've made some progress getting things like
clock and IRQ drivers out of arch/arm, we're still a long way from
sorting that out.  Or maybe that original accusation was baseless for
modern kernels, based on the old 1.x days when we had a arch/arm/drivers
subdirectory which people have a hard time forgetting?

So, no, there will be no new drivers under arch/arm.  They must be in the
drivers subtree somewhere.