Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support

[Daniel Walker]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:12:03AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Daniel Walker <dwalker@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> 
> No.  The idea behind splitting them is to allow current platforms with
> active maintainers to progress without being held back.  The older
> platforms can stay and have an opportunity to modernize. 
> 
> The kernel is a moving target, without some minimal effort to keep
> platforms up to date, the effort to continue to maintain/modernize them
> can become more of a pain than it's worth.  If maintainers of these older
> platforms are willing to put in the work, nobody will be SOL.  If
> nobody shows interest in modernizing these older platforms (which seems
> to be the case based on the last couple years), then it is reasonable
> IMO for them to fade away slowly.


According to a prior email Tony suggested that OMAP was split for purely
technical reasons.. If code is shared in some way , or has synergies, and there's no
technical reason to split a sub-architecture, then to me there's no win in splitting
things.. It's just more directories, more confusion etc.. The confusion
would come from someone wanting to find the code related to a platform,
but woops there's a bunch of directories, or code flow and how the
sub-architecture is strung together .. Personally I found OMAP very
confusing in that regard.

ARM and the sub-architectures is already confusing I don't think we need
to start compounding the problem by allowing random whatever-you-want
sub-directories from every sub-architecture.

Daniel
--
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/