arch/powerpc/sysdev: dumping ground or only for shared drivers?

[Grant Likely]

On 5/15/07, Mark A. Greer <mgreer at mvista.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 04:06:40PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > If this is how we are going we should move some code from arch/
> > powerpc/platforms into sysdev (for example the 5200 platform has its
> > pic code and some other bits that would be candidate to move into
> > sysdev).
>
> I like Paul's take as well and I don't like the idea of moving the
> 5200 pci code, etc. to sysdev.  I just can't explain why.
>
> But, I'll try anyway:
>
> The 5200 is an SoC so all the portions of that chip are tighly coupled
> with the 5200.  It doesn't make sense to put half of the 5200 code under
> platforms and the other half under sysdev (unless the code is shared
> with something that isn't a 5200).

Actually, that's a good explaination

I must agree.  If there is little chance that the code will be used by
any other platform, then don't split it up for the sake of (for
example) putting all the pic code in the same place.  I think there
are fewer opportunities for confusion if only code that is actually
shared goes in the shared directory.  (ie. "how worried do I need to
be about affecting other platforms when I modify this code?").

> The marvell code is not tied to any particular processor family/SoC.
> There are versions that work on 7xx/74xx, and 970.  So, you could say
> that code is shared amongst several families even though all of the
> platform code that uses it happens to be under embedded6xx.

I also agree here.

g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc. P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely at secretlab.ca
(403) 399-0195