Re: [PATCH 7/7] [v2] drivers/misc: introduce Freescale hypervisor management driver

On Friday 03 June 2011, Timur Tabi wrote:

Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

I don't think it's correct to think of a hypervisor as firmware, so I don't
think drivers/firmware is better.

I'm not sure that creating virt/fsl and putting the driver in there is a good
idea, because it will be the only driver in that directory.  Unlike KVM, this
driver is just a collection of front-ends to our hypervisor API.  The actual
hypervisor is completely separate.  That's why I put it in drivers/misc, because
it's just a single driver with a miscellaneous collection of interfaces.

quoted

Ok, fair enough. If nobody has a strong preference any other way, just make it
drivers/firmware then.

Did you mean to say drivers/misc?

Sorry, I misread your first sentence above. I thought you said that you prefer
drivers/firmware over virt/fsl. drivers/misc is definitely the wrong
place for this, please choose a better one. Maybe drivers/virt/ ?

	Arnd