From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:18:23 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 0/21] ARM: start to move SoC code into arch/arm/mach-* In-Reply-To: References: <1422166283-20822-1-git-send-email-yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com> <20150201040217.03b74a23@lilith> Message-ID: <54CFB15F.7050108@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 01/31/2015 08:20 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Albert, > > On 31 January 2015 at 20:02, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >> Hello Masahiro, >> >> On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 15:11:02 +0900, Masahiro Yamada >> wrote: >>> >>> This series can be applied on the current u-boot/master >>> (commit 37b608a52dcb133) >> >> I'd rather not have all mach-* directories just below arch/arm/. Can't >> they be created under arch/arm/soc/ instead? That would give a cleaner >> structure IMO. > > It does save a level and I am forever typing cpu/armv7 to get what > feels like nowhere...this is what the kernel does and it does seem > convenient. Do note that arch/arm/mach* doesn't/won't entirely match what the Linux kernel does. In Linux, arch/arm64 doesn't have mach-* sub-directories, and the arm/arm64 architectures are different so don't share the code in arch/arm/mach-tegra, so there's work underway to move stuff out of arch/arm/mach-tegra and into either appropriate subsystem directories or drivers/soc/tegra. Given all that, I suspect we should decide the directory layout of U-Boot based on what's best for U-Boot, not by trying to chase the changing target of the Linux kernel.