Status of arch/arm in linux-next
davej at redhat.com
Tue Apr 19 12:27:42 EDT 2011
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 06:01:19PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > Thinking of it, is it OK to put chip CPUfreq drivers into
> > drivers/cpufreq/* instead of into the arch/arm/* platform
> > code as everyone does right now? We could probably
> > fix that and bring down the diffstat considerably.
> That's something to discuss with Dave Jones and other people
> interested in cpufre. Right now, all cpufreq drivers, including
> those for other architectures are in arch/.
> I think it would be good to have the out of the individual
> platforms, in particular in order to get better reviews of
> new cpufreq drivers by people that are interested in them.
The platform drivers are by their nature architecture specific,
so arch/ seems apropos. drivers/platform/arm/ maybe ?
Though, having arm do something different to every other arch seems
a bit awkward too. Everyone else has their cpufreq platform driver
somewhere under arch/whatever/../cpufreq/.. so changing that
violates the principle of least surprise.
I'm also not convinced that moving them would increase review of changes.
What problem is this solving again ?
More information about the linux-arm-kernel