Hi Russell, 2016-04-04 3:25 GMT+09:00 Russell King - ARM Linux <[email protected]>: > On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 11:39:18PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> We have growing number of mach-* directories in arch/arm, and I guess >> it might be a good time to discuss moving them into a sub-directory. > > What does it buy us? Let me summarise the actual change: > > - Move up to 71 arch/arm/mach-* directories to arch/arm/platforms/*, > which just means another level of directory structure. We still > end up with up to 71 directories in arch/arm/platforms/
True, but we can separate non-SoC directories (kernel/, mm/, configs/, etc.) from mach- directories, at least. > - The ability to use obj-y rather than machine-y, where both already > work in the same way. Yes, but Kbuild standard Makefiles might provide more flexible directory structures to tidy up similar SoC families from the same vendor. For example, arch/arm/platforms/samsung/ arch/arm/platforms/samsung/exynos/ arch/arm/platforms/samsung/s3c64xx/ instead of arch/arm/plat-samsung/ arch/arm/mach-exynos/ arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/ I am missing something, though. > Is there anything I missed? > > If that is all, then I really do not like this change - it's seems > to be churn for no benefit, and that's something we really should be > minimising. Linus Torvalds has historically moaned at the ARM > architecture for stuff like this. OK. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
