From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA1367B5F for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2006 17:52:15 +1100 (EST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 07:52:10 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/16] add base support for Celleb platform Message-ID: <20061117065210.GC15013@lst.de> References: <200611150931.kAF9VciJ023243@toshiba.co.jp> <20061115183621.GB21633@lst.de> <1163633498.5940.272.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1163633498.5940.272.camel@localhost.localdomain> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 10:31:37AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > I'm ok with separate platform directories for different HVs like Toshiba > and Sony. I'm not sure we need to keep ibmcell only in the first dir > tho, could be cellnative for all native cell (non-HV) implementations. I'm not sure cellnativ is the right name, once we get wildly diverging hardware platforms. What would be a nice platform name for the current CELL BE + spider hardware as in all the existing ibm, sony and toshiba products?