On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 01:05:36AM +0000, Wu, Hao wrote:That's fine.
I'm somewhat neutral on this. If someone non-intel starts using DFL we couldOn 6/15/21 1:08 AM, Wu, Hao wrote:It's fine, but the description here is a little confusing on vendor/framework
xrt is also not a vendor, more a subdevice framework like dfl.Subject: [PATCH v4 1/4] fpga: dfl: reorganize to subdir layoutHi Tom,
From: Tom Rix <trix@xxxxxxxxxx>
Follow drivers/net/ethernet/ which has control configs
NET_VENDOR_BLA that map to drivers/net/ethernet/bla
Since fpgas do not have many vendors, drop the 'VENDOR' and use
FPGA_BLA.
Thanks for this patch. : )
DFL is not a vendor, but something can be shared/reused. It's possible that
other vendors reuse the same concepts and the drivers of DFL. If vendor
drivers need to be moved inside sub folders, then maybe it's better to
leave DFL in the parent folder?
I am not sure what you mean by other dfl vendors can you give an example ?
handling. No other vendor so far, but it's possible, DFL can be used in
non-intel device, and related drivers can be reused as well. Then a fpga
mgr driver depends on DFL, should be put inside dfl folder or new
vendor's subfolder?
Hao
also
move the common parts back ...
That being said, I'm not super convinced we have to move stuff in theI remember that the first submission of our code is having everything inside a sub
first place.
folder, but was suggested that to have everything moved out, this is why we have
dfl files here now. To be honest, I have the similar feeling as you, I didn't see any
strong reason to make this something we must do, but both solutions should be
fine. : )
Thanks
Hao
- Moritz