Re: [PATCH v0 01/11] stm class: Introduce an abstraction for System Trace Module devices

[Mathieu Poirier]

On 19 March 2015 at 08:23, Alexander Shishkin
<alexander.shishkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> I forgot to mention in my previous email...  I think the hierarchy of
>> our respective tracing module along with the generic-stm probably
>> needs a review.
>>
>> Currently we have drivers/coresight, drivers/intel_th and drivers/stm.
>>
>> To me it doesn't scale - what happens when other architectures come
>> out with their own hw tracing technologies?
>>
>> I suggest we move everything under drivers/hwtracing and as such have:
>>
>> drivers/hwtracing
>> drivers/hwtracing/intel_ht
>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight
>> drivers/hwtracing/stm
>>
>> That way other architectures can add drivers for their own hw tracing
>> technology without further polluting the drivers/ directory and
>> concentrating everything in the same area.  What's your view on that?
>
> I wanted to suggest something similar, actually, if you don't mind
> moving drivers/coresight, then let's do it.

That's a deal - my next patchset will reflect that new organisation.

>
> Regards,
> --
> Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/