[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <w3qrFtorGLZ_wMnr_Mi7cltli9g8jsMtiQ7Z1Usnj2IKfJ1MJz6-wxlIAEQ-ErgU1x6IBxdAIHBHtQ3OOT_FJOuUYheILlUc20ysNL_zroo=@protonmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 14:51:30 +0000
From: Barnabás Pőcze <pobrn@...tonmail.com>
To: "andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com"
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel@...ica.org" <devel@...ica.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
"andy@...nel.org" <andy@...nel.org>,
"mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com" <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"bgolaszewski@...libre.com" <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
"wsa@...nel.org" <wsa@...nel.org>,
"lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
"hdegoede@...hat.com" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"mgross@...ux.intel.com" <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
"robert.moore@...el.com" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
"erik.kaneda@...el.com" <erik.kaneda@...el.com>,
"sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com" <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
"laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com"
<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
"kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com" <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] platform: x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver
2021. január 18., hétfő 14:51 keltezéssel, Andy Shevchenko írta:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:12:34AM +0000, Barnabás Pőcze wrote:
> > 2021. január 18., hétfő 1:34 keltezéssel, Daniel Scally írta:
>
> > Have you considered putting the source (and header) files into a dedicated
> > folder? I think it'd help manageability in the long run, and it'd be immediately
> > obvious that these source files form a single "unit".
>
> What would be the folder name? Because, for example, intel_cht_int33fe* have no
> folder (yet?) and here it's kinda similar case when HID describes something
> else than just one IP.
I think "intel_skl_int3472" would not be a bad name for the folder. And I believe
"intel_cht_int33fe" could be given its own folder as well.
Regards,
Barnabás Pőcze
Powered by blists - more mailing lists