Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@csgroup.eu> writes: > Le 20/09/2022 à 10:56, Nicholas Piggin a écrit : >> On Tue Sep 20, 2022 at 3:01 AM AEST, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> >> This series is a nice cleanup. No comments yet but kernel/ is getting >> pretty crowded. Should we make some subdirectories for subarch things >> like mm has? >> >> Can do that after your series. Probably requires another merge window >> to do it. >> > > By the way, I'm wondering how we decide whether some code goes in > arch/powerpc/kernel/ or in arch/powerpc/lib/
On a case-by-case basis? :) I think our lib is *mostly* routines that are library like, eg. string copy, memcpy, memcmp etc. Though there's also single step code, code patching etc. I guess one thing they have in common is that they're (somewhat) self contained routines that do a specific thing, and that they are called from various other parts of the kernel. On the other hand code in kernel *tends* to be more larger things, like early boot sequence, interrupt/syscall entry, module loading etc. But really kernel is where everything lives that doesn't have anywhere else to go, so it's a bit of a dumping ground. Talking specifically about all these CPU files, I think we could create an arch/powerpc/cpu for them. On x86 they have arch/x86/kernel/cpu, but the kernel seems redundant. With all the CPU specs, CPU setups, and dt_cpu_ftrs.c we'd have ~4500 lines that could go in arch/powerpc/cpu. Which seems like enough to justify a directory. cheers