Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support
From: Tony Lindgren
Date: Tue Oct 29 2013 - 14:41:00 EST
* Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx> [131029 10:40]:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Daniel Walker <dwalker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Personally I think splitting mach- stuff isn't very useful or
> > interesting.. There's just no technical reason for it, for example x86
> > and x86_64 was a win from my perspective , there's a lot more reason to
> > keep similar things together than to split things up.
> There are definitely valid technical reasons for it; the old and new
> platforms share no code, and the legacy platforms are unlikely to be
> updated to modern infrastructure anytime soon. Other platforms are
> managed in similar manners, such as OMAP, imx/mxs, etc.
Yeah there are still few valid reasons to have separate mach directories.
The main reason why mach-omap2 was originally set up separately from
mach-omap1 was because the IO space was different. And we could not
properly deal with that until CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT few years ago.
So we placed the shared code into plat-omap, which worked OK but is
not really needed any longer with device tree. We have only dmtimer
and legacy DMA code left in plat-omap pretty much. And those will be
moved to live under drivers/.
Even with most issues fixed, it still does not not make sense to merge
mach-omap1 and mach-omap2. For example, even if somebody wanted to do it
as a hobby project, we'd have to compile things with v4 or v5 flags,
which won't work properly for SMP cores at least :)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/