linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] ARM: start to move arch/arm/mach-* to arch/arm/platforms/*

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 4 Apr 2016 10:57:56 +0900
From:	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Emilio López <emilio@...pez.com.ar>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
	<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	Marcus Cooper <codekipper@...il.com>,
	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] ARM: start to move arch/arm/mach-* to arch/arm/platforms/*

Hi Russell,

2016-04-04 3:25 GMT+09:00 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>:
> On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 11:39:18PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> We have growing number of mach-* directories in arch/arm, and I guess
>> it might be a good time to discuss moving them into a sub-directory.
>
> What does it buy us?  Let me summarise the actual change:
>
> - Move up to 71 arch/arm/mach-* directories to arch/arm/platforms/*,
>   which just means another level of directory structure.  We still
>   end up with up to 71 directories in arch/arm/platforms/

True, but we can separate non-SoC directories (kernel/, mm/, configs/, etc.)
from mach- directories, at least.


> - The ability to use obj-y rather than machine-y, where both already
>   work in the same way.

Yes, but Kbuild standard Makefiles might provide more flexible
directory structures
to tidy up similar SoC families from the same vendor.

For example,

arch/arm/platforms/samsung/
arch/arm/platforms/samsung/exynos/
arch/arm/platforms/samsung/s3c64xx/

instead of

arch/arm/plat-samsung/
arch/arm/mach-exynos/
arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/

I am missing something, though.



> Is there anything I missed?
>
> If that is all, then I really do not like this change - it's seems
> to be churn for no benefit, and that's something we really should be
> minimising.  Linus Torvalds has historically moaned at the ARM
> architecture for stuff like this.

OK.


-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada