Re: [PATCH 7/7] [v2] drivers/misc: introduce Freescale hypervisor management driver
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: 2011-06-07 19:16:35
Also in:
lkml
On Tuesday 07 June 2011 18:49:02 Chris Metcalf wrote:
quoted
You can probably argue that the tile drivers do fit in here as long as they are specific to the hypervisor and not to some SOC specific hardware.Can you clarify that? I think you're contrasting something like an ARM core that was licensed and put in a SoC by some random vendor, and you could have an endless stream of drivers for that case. The Tilera core isn't being licensed; it's sold more like an Intel chip with a fixed set of interfaces available only from Tilera. The particular interface in question here is SPI, and the core itself knows how to boot the chip over SPI by finding an SPI ROM and reading the boot stream out of it directly after power-up. So does that match with your model of "drivers/platform/tile"? Maybe we have a winner! :-)
I'm not really against drivers/platform/tile for this, the only potential problem that I see with this is that having more stuff in drivers/platform might lead to having even more other stuff in there that should really go into another place. Obviously, if the device is a raw SPI host, the driver should actually go into drivers/spi/spi_tile.c rather than drivers/platform/tile/spi.c. For the spi flash driver that goes through the hypervisor abstraction, I think drivers/virt/tile would be better than driver/platform/tile, but we should really have a new "abstract flash character driver" subsystem for that. Arnd