On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:59:53PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > b) drivers/bus/<something> > This would make a lot more sense if we followed the scheme I explained > in my discussion to Jason Gunthorpe, where we basically treat this > bus as a parent node in the device tree for anything that can get remapped. > Without that change, it feels a little misplaced Also, FWIW, recall this related discussion and other possible DT binding: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg219992.html drivers/bus/orion-mbus.c feels like the right option, but when I looked at it, getting the DT binding, and full dynamicness setup seemed like it would be best done after non-DT support was purged, and that is somewhat contigent on getting the irqchip and timer stuff sorted (see my first attempt at that): https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1852011/ Guess it depends where you want to draw the line on cleanups before something can be accepted.. Regards, Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
