[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <wrfjr3d0453y.fsf@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 19:49:53 -0400
From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: David Kershner <david.kershner@...sys.com>, corbet@....net,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
erik.arfvidson@...sys.com, timothy.sell@...sys.com,
hofrat@...dl.org, dzickus@...hat.com, alexander.curtin@...sys.com,
janani.rvchndrn@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
prarit@...hat.com, david.binder@...sys.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org,
sparmaintainer@...sys.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] add bus driver for Unisys s-Par paravirtualized devices to arch/x86
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:01:55AM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:
>> > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 03:27:56AM -0400, David Kershner wrote:
>> >> This patchset moves the visorbus driver
>> >> (fromdrivers/staging/unisys/visorbus)
>> >> and its dependent headers files (from drivers/staging/unisys/include)
>> >> out of staging into the main kernel tree.
>> >>
>> >> The visorbus driver is a bus driver for various paravirtualized devices
>> >> presented within a Unisys s-Par guest environment. Drivers for these
>> >> devices are also currently present under drivers/staging/unisys/, which we
>> >> intend to also move out of staging immediately after visorbus. All of
>> >> these other drivers are dependent upon visorbus and the include directory,
>> >> which is why we would like to move these first.
>> >>
>> >> Our initial consultations with various members of the community have led us
>> >> to the conclusion that the most appropriate locations for these is:
>> >> arch/x86/visorbus/ (driver)
>> >> include/linux/visorbus/ (header files)
>> >>
>> >> The rationale is that visorbus is dependent on x86-64 architecture.
>> >
>> > What makes it dependent on x86? What prevents it from running on some
>> > other architecture (not the fact that no one has made such hardware,
>> > just the code reasons please.)
>>
>> It's dependent on system firmware which is only available on the S-Par
>> platform which is x86_64 only. The closest similarity is probably what
>> you find on the PPC and Sparc platforms.
>
> Ok, but still no need to put it under arch/ anything, it should go in
> drivers/ like all other drivers and busses are, no matter what the arch
> it happens to run on is.
I don't think thats obvious. arch/x86/kvm is an example of this, Sparc
and PPC also have their stuff under arch/.
I am open, if people prefer to have drivers/visorbus I can support that.
I find right now it's really messy with things being put all over the
place, and it's not obvious what the real placement is for all of this.
Jes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists