linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] MIPS: Move device-tree files to a common location

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+zpvK4Zbp4cN2eq3hfGDc09x3d4+b_TdEgnSQ5063rZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:04:46 -0500
From:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To:	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@...tec.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Jayachandran C <jchandra@...adcom.com>,
	Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] MIPS: Move device-tree files to a common location

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
>>>> > arch/arm/boot/dts/<vendor>/
>>>> >
>>>> > Is this something we should do for the MIPS and update the other architectures
>>>> > to follow that scheme?
>>>>
>>>> I recall reading that as well and that it would be adopted for ARM64,
>>>> but that hasn't seemed to have happened.  Perhaps Olof (CC'ed) will no
>>>> more.
>>>
>>> Yeah, I highly recommend having a directory per vendor. We didn't on ARM,
>>> and the amount of files in that directory is becoming pretty
>>> insane. Moving to a subdirectory structure later gets messy which is
>>> why we've been holding off on it.
>>
>> It would mean we can change our scripts to operate on "interesting"
>> DTS files from
>>
>>      do-something-with $(git grep -l $vendor, -- arch/arm/boot/dts)
>>
>> to
>>
>>     do-something-with arch/arm/boot/dts/$vendor/*
>>
>> which is easier to type...
>
> Btw, do you mean chip-vendor or device-vendor with vendor?
> Device-vendor could get a bit messy on the source part as the router
> manufacturers tend to switch them quite often. E.g. d-link used arm,
> mips and ubi32 chips from marvell, ubicom, broadcom, atheros, realtek
> and ralink for their dir-615 router, happily switching back and forth.
> There are 14 known different hardware revisions of it where the chip
> differed from the previous one.

There's probably no hard and fast rule that works perfectly for
everything. Since the chip/soc generally defines most of the platform,
I would say follow the chip vendor. A few "../other-vendor/" includes
would be okay, but they should be the exception. 3rd party boards with
common daughter cards come to mind here.

Rob
--
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/