From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932946AbeAKJwA (ORCPT <rfc822;ralf@linux-mips.org> + 1 other);
        Thu, 11 Jan 2018 04:52:00 -0500
Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com ([209.85.192.169]:45767 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932748AbeAKJv7 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 11 Jan 2018 04:51:59 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBoumVHANiyvbkWrZKZ98jsD9X9I906kMTdybMUjW3pB4miC9RbKpRmx834gJLfknirZJwSZ0gw==
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:21:52 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Xu Wei <xuwei5@hisilicon.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 00/13] drivers: Boot Constraint core
Message-ID: <20180111095152.GI3626@vireshk-i7>
References: <cover.1513264961.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <CAOesGMgeaWd5z7VEiVhs=Ei3ZWZQN0C-p4smTMCy3AYrZ-TdTA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMgeaWd5z7VEiVhs=Ei3ZWZQN0C-p4smTMCy3AYrZ-TdTA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>

On 10-01-18, 10:54, Olof Johansson wrote:
> The SoC-specific pieces should preferrably go under drivers/soc
> instead, to reduce cross-tree dependencies when introducing new SoC
> variants.
> 
> They're more related to the SoC than to the boot_constraint framework anyway.

Hmm, okay.

> Bikeshed: We've traditionally had really terse and precise names under
> drivers/. This is the first verbose one with a _ in it. Maybe find a
> shorter name or just concatenate to 'bootconstraints'? We didn't call
> it remote_proc or rapid_io, etc, either. :)

Sure.

-- 
viresh