Ulf Hansson [off-list ref] writes:

On 16 December 2015 at 02:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

2015-12-16 10:11 GMT+09:00 Sebastian Reichel [off-list ref]:

quoted

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 04:53:31PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

There are 6 power domain drivers in
arch/arm, 3 in drivers/clk, and 3 in drivers/soc.

If we ever have to support a different architecture which happens to use
a similar power domain, then we want it to be in a location which makes
it easy for sharing it in the first place. As it stands today, it does
not seem useful to me to have this code in arch/arm/mach-bcm/ at all.

Maybe there is room from a drivers/power/domains/ of some kind?

I like the idea, but let's include generic power domain maintainers
in this discussion, as I suggested here (I got a power domain driver
patch for drivers/power just a few days ago):

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/15/815

Also somebody would have to step up to maintain that directory.

This could go into drivers/soc. We put there a lot of mach-specific
stuff which we want to make a little more generic (like generic enough
multiplatform, multiarchitecture etc). Rockchip has its own power
domains there. Dove and Mediatek seem as well but I am not sure. Some
other architectures keep this still in arm/mach (exynos, ux500, zx,
imx, s34c64xx, shmobile) but this looks more of like a legacy choice.

Agree, drivers/soc is good.

OK, I've resent with a move to drivers/soc/bcm/.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20151216/5f8e7d40/attachment.sig>