lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 07:22:45 +0000 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, horms@...ge.net.au, linux@....linux.org.uk, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lethal@...ux-sh.org, olof@...om.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 - first shot On Friday 04 May 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I'm not sure if I understand your point correctly, so please let me clarify. > > Do you think it's better to have a separate mach-emma directory for the > new hardware because technically it is a different platform and the fact > that it was developed by the same manufacturer as the mach-shmobile hardware > is less important? Yes, that was my point. Compare this to how we have omap and davinci for TI, orion and pxa for Marvell, or mxs and imx for Freescale. These are all for the most part independent developments that happened to end up being owned by the same company. We try to group code based on technical similarities, not on who makes them. If you are able to share code between multiple completely independent socs you work on, the result shouldn't be to put them into a directory you "own", but to generalize the common parts so they can be shared with everyone else, too. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists