RE: [PATCH 0/3 v2] drivers/bus: Freescale Management Complex bus driver patch series

From: Stuart Yoder
Date: Mon Sep 22 2014 - 13:59:29 EST

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Phillips [mailto:kim.phillips@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 11:53 AM
> To: Rivera Jose-B46482
> Cc: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; arnd@xxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-
> B07421; agraf@xxxxxxx; linuxppc-release@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3 v2] drivers/bus: Freescale Management Complex bus driver patch series
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 17:49:38 -0500
> "J. German Rivera" <German.Rivera@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Issues pending resolution not addressed by v2:
> > - What to do with Doxygen comments in patch 1
> It's clear they should be removed.
> > - Whether to move or not FSL-specific header files added in include/linux,
> > by this patch series, to another location
> there wasn't a valid objection against moving them under fsl/ and
> changing them to use dashes instead of underscores, was there?

There was no objection, but here is the observation. The current
convention seems to be that under include/linux are 'subsystem'

There is no other "company" that has an include/linux/[company-name] that I can
see. Freescale seems to be the only one. And there is only a single driver
in there. So it looks like a complete anomaly.

Why is that?

I guess we could try moving our stuff to incluce/linux/fsl and see if there is
any negative feedback on it.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at