From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rvaswani@codeaurora.org (Rohit Vaswani) Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 17:26:57 -0700 Subject: Use of drivers/platform and matching include? In-Reply-To: <20131005171323.GB5780@kroah.com> References: <20131004114128.GL12758@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20131004132209.GB23923@kroah.com> <20131005171323.GB5780@kroah.com> Message-ID: <52535151.2000508@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org 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 >> 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//) > 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 Thanks, Rohit Vaswani -- The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation