From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] [v2] drivers/misc: introduce Freescale hypervisor management driver Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:28:05 -0500 Message-ID: <4DE8FD85.7000703@freescale.com> References: <1306953337-15698-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <201106012340.14237.arnd@arndb.de> <4DE8008E.9030008@freescale.com> <201106031724.44957.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201106031724.44957.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-console-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: kumar.gala@freescale.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, greg@kroah.com, akpm@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-console@vger.kernel.org Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> > I don't think it's correct to think of a hypervisor as firmware, so I don't >> > think drivers/firmware is better. >> > >> > I'm not sure that creating virt/fsl and putting the driver in there is a good >> > idea, because it will be the only driver in that directory. Unlike KVM, this >> > driver is just a collection of front-ends to our hypervisor API. The actual >> > hypervisor is completely separate. That's why I put it in drivers/misc, because >> > it's just a single driver with a miscellaneous collection of interfaces. > Ok, fair enough. If nobody has a strong preference any other way, just make it > drivers/firmware then. Did you mean to say drivers/misc? -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale