Use of drivers/platform and matching include?

[rvaswani@codeaurora.org (Rohit Vaswani)]

On 10/5/2013 10:13 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 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.

We agree that there is no need for a dump *all* drivers under 
arm/mach-foo in drivers/platform/foo/. The msm bus driver would be added 
under drivers/bus/. But, we still have some drivers which are quite SoC 
specific and not in the general category of the sub-directories present 
under drivers.
As Kumar mentioned earlier -

An example driver would be the means we utilize to communicate memory regions between various HW blocks on the SoC.  So a video/media core driver might need access to a header/functions from the memory region driver.

Would drivers/misc/qcom-* or drivers/misc/qcom/* be a reasonable place to add them ? and the headers could go into include/linux/qcom-*.h

<snip>

Thanks,
Rohit Vaswani

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation