Time for cell code reshuffle?
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
benh at kernel.crashing.org
Sun Dec 23 08:00:14 EST 2007
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 20:15 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > It seems platforms/cell should have the shared and/or generic code,
> and the other
> > stuff moved into a new platform directory, but is it worth the
> effort?
>
> There is very little code in platforms/cell that can not be generic,
> so I think
> it's not worth splitting it. The only IBM blade specific files are
> cbe_cpufreq_pmi.c and parts of setup.c and pervasive.c. Everything
> else could
> be shared by about any generic implementation without a hypervisor.
Another option is to have:
platforms/celleb -> platforms/beat
and withing platforms/cell, rename blade specific files to
something (can't find what, works on CAB too) and add celleb
"bare metal" files.
A platform directly doesn't have to deal with one platform. For example,
platforms/44x contains a lot of board support.
Now, one question is how far can we merge celleb support with the common
blade/CAB code...
Cheers,
Ben.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list