[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1643662.QIDsTbCMZg@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:01:57 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>, Fu Wei <fu.wei@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
rruigrok@...eaurora.org, harba@...eaurora.org,
Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
G Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
wei@...hat.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
Suravee Suthikulanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
Leo Duran <leo.duran@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer
On Friday, July 01, 2016 04:00:34 PM Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 06/30/2016 03:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> >> GTDT is part of ACPI spec, drivers/acpi/ is for driver code of
> >> ACPI spec, I think it can stay in drivers/acpi/ from this point
> >> of view, am I right?
> >
> > The question is not "Can it?", but "Does it need to?".
> >
> > It is in the spec, but still there's only one architecture needing it.
> >
> > There is no way to test it on any other architecture and no reason to build it
> > for any other architecture, so why does it need to be located in drivers/acpi/ ?
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> what is the problem of having it in drivers/acpi ?
There's no reason for it to be there.
> There are cpufreq-dt, speedstep*, tegra124-* in drivers/cpufreq.
Yes, they are, but for a reason. Having them in there makes it easier to
rework and clean up the core.
> clocksource-probe which is DT based with different drivers using it in
> drivers/clocksource with a pletore of different archs.
So maybe the GTDT code should be there too?
> Cstate code which is only used by x86 is in drivers/acpi, it is only
> used by x86/ia64 and it isn't a problem.
It is a problem. drivers/acpi/ is not the right place for arch-specific code.
> There is a small chunk in arch/x86/kernel/acpi and it doesn't facilitate the
> comprehension of the code.
>
> IMHO, having all ACPI code in the same directory will encourage the
> consolidation.
The consolidation of what exactly?
In particular, how does the GTDT code in drivers/acpi/ help to consolidate
anything?
Thanks,
Rafael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists