On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 09:46:30AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > I don't have a good answer though. If it wasn't for the arm64 fork, > locating these under arch/arm somewhere would really be the reasonable > answer, like we used to do on powerpc. :( Are you seriously suggesting going back to having drivers under arch/arm because we can't find a home for them in the drivers subtree? Having made a big thing about things as small as clock source drivers, IRQ drivers and such like which "shouldn't be under arch/arm" and moving them out, to then say about finding somewhere under arch/arm for drivers is very much a case of double-standards. I've heard this accusation that we have too many drivers in arch/arm many times, and although we've made some progress getting things like clock and IRQ drivers out of arch/arm, we're still a long way from sorting that out. Or maybe that original accusation was baseless for modern kernels, based on the old 1.x days when we had a arch/arm/drivers subdirectory which people have a hard time forgetting? So, no, there will be no new drivers under arch/arm. They must be in the drivers subtree somewhere. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
