From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH] firmware: Make firmware drivers
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 01:45:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTinGMN8A99YZMVa1XDRuy3rUSO2UGg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110621003507.GG1905@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 20:35, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 02:25:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 14:11, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
>> > "drivers/firmware" is the obvious name for both, but that makes
>> > it ambiguous. I'd suggest to split the two subsystems into
>> > "drivers/host-firmware" and "drivers/device-firmware".
>
>> i honestly dont see how this is better. the drivers/firmware/ isnt
>> exactly overflowing, and differentiating between the two modes doesnt
>> seem to gain us anything.
>
> Do we have anything like an actual subsystem in firmware? If we do and
> it's sensible to do things that affect all firmwares then splitting
> seems reasonable but if not then it's less clear.
i dont think there is. we havent hit enough critical mass yet to warrant it.
-mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-21 1:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20110617103218.GA29723@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
2011-06-17 11:40 ` [PATCH] firmware: Make firmware drivers generally available Lars-Peter Clausen
2011-06-17 13:16 ` Clemens Ladisch
2011-06-17 15:56 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-06-17 18:11 ` Clemens Ladisch
2011-06-17 18:25 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-06-21 0:35 ` Mark Brown
2011-06-21 1:45 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2011-06-17 15:56 ` Mike Frysinger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=BANLkTinGMN8A99YZMVa1XDRuy3rUSO2UGg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=clemens@ladisch.de \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox