Re: [PATCHv3 1/4] ARM: tegra: Add AHB driver |
|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/4] ARM: tegra: Add AHB driver
- From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:47:36 +0000
- Cc: "Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxx>, "devicetree-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <devicetree-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-tegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-tegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <20120427084015.cb7c8e00c7d9a4cd01faa5ae@nvidia.com>
- User-agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/3.4.0-rc3; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; )
On Friday 27 April 2012, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> What about having this driver under "drivers/amba"?
>
> If other similiar drivers are coming up, it's easy to find rather than
> having this arch/arm/mach-*. There may be some possibility of
> generalization later, then. Also it meets the requirement of no
> "struct xxxx_driver" under arch/arm. Arnd?
I'm fine with either drivers/amba (arguing that it's for a specific
amba bus even if it's highly platform specific) or arch/arm/mach-tegra
(arguing that it's platform code and not actually a device driver even
if it appears like one). If Russell doesn't mind having it in
drivers/amba, I'd say we should go for that.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[ARM Kernel]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Video for Linux]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Photo]
[Yosemite News]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Free Online Dating]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
[XFree86]