Re: [PATCH 00/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 - first shot

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Friday 04 May 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> I'm not sure if I understand your point correctly, so please let me clarify.
> 
> Do you think it's better to have a separate mach-emma directory for the
> new hardware because technically it is a different platform and the fact
> that it was developed by the same manufacturer as the mach-shmobile hardware
> is less important?

Yes, that was my point. Compare this to how we have omap and davinci for TI,
orion and pxa for Marvell, or mxs and imx for Freescale. These are all
for the most part independent developments that happened to end up being
owned by the same company.

We try to group code based on technical similarities, not on who makes them.
If you are able to share code between multiple completely independent socs
you work on, the result shouldn't be to put them into a directory you "own",
but to generalize the common parts so they can be shared with everyone else,
too.

	Arnd
--
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/