From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:40:57 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 04/21] ARM: tegra: collect SoC sources into mach-tegra In-Reply-To: <1422166283-20822-5-git-send-email-yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com> References: <1422166283-20822-1-git-send-email-yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com> <1422166283-20822-5-git-send-email-yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com> Message-ID: <54C67C29.3040401@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 01/24/2015 11:11 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > This commit moves files as follows: > > arch/arm/cpu/arm720t/tegra20/* -> arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra20/* > arch/arm/cpu/arm720t/tegra30/* -> arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra30/* ... Bikeshed: I know that this matches what the Linux kernel has for 32-bit ARM, but I've always disliked using the word "machine" to describe an SoC. Would just "tegra" or "soc-tegra" be better than "mach-tegra"? Feel free to entirely ignore this though; I don't feel too strongly. Oh and one more thing: We're starting to work on 64-bit Tegra support in the Linux kernel. A fair amount of the code moved by this patch is likely to apply on both 32-bit and 64-bit Tegra. Will arch/arm support 64-bit within U-Boot, or will there be a separate directory for 32- and 64-bit ARM? If so, should this code all be moved to something more like soc/tegra/... or drivers/tegra/... or drivers/soc/tegra/... or ... so it can be shared between the architectures?