[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vc8q_WuFURhG_z5zj9VztS-d8_RiSHQYgh-HFTjzP0MEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 00:29:41 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
Irina Tirdea <irina.tirdea@...el.com>,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] clk: x86: Add Atom PMC platform clocks
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 08:49:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 02:26:21AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Pierre-Louis Bossart
>> > There should really be some Documentation about how to choose an include
>> > directory :-)
>>
>> So true!
(1)
> The options are:
>
> a) include/linux/x86
> b) include/linux/platform_data/x86
Correct.
> In my opinion, a) looks like architecture and would be difficult to distinguish
> from arch/x86/include. b) on the other hand clearly notes that it is for
> platform specific information. If it was platform instead of platform_data, that
> would be even better, but that could be a later change. But I think the
> confusion over x86 arch in a) is worse than the more subtle (in my opinion)
> distinction between "platform" and "platform_data".
>
> I would want x86 maintainer approval before adding a), while b) I'm happy to add
> ourselves - and we already have agreement from tglx on that.
>
> To move forward, let's go with b).
Let me say I'm not fully satisfied, though for sake of moving forward
I agree with these arguments.
> The new x86 directory clearly separates out
> content which will make it trivial to move later if the need arises.
See (1). I would really appreciate if some agreement and documentation
will be developed.
In that case one of us would really have one serious argument to one
of the sides.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists