On Friday 27 April 2012, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> What about having this driver under "drivers/amba"?
>
> If other similiar drivers are coming up, it's easy to find rather than
> having this arch/arm/mach-*. There may be some possibility of
> generalization later, then. Also it meets the requirement of no
> "struct xxxx_driver" under arch/arm. Arnd?
I'm fine with either drivers/amba (arguing that it's for a specific
amba bus even if it's highly platform specific) or arch/arm/mach-tegra
(arguing that it's platform code and not actually a device driver even
if it appears like one). If Russell doesn't mind having it in
drivers/amba, I'd say we should go for that.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
