From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc: Christoffer Dall <cdall@cs.columbia.edu>, Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>, "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "gleb@redhat.com" <gleb@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] ARM: KVM: move GIC/timer code to a common location Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 09:46:29 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <518CB3E5.7090504@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <518CABBB.7050909@redhat.com> On 10/05/13 09:11, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 10/05/2013 09:23, Marc Zyngier ha scritto: >>>> 1. Should we have a namespace per arch in the include directory, as in >>>> include/kvm/arm? >> So I thought of that at one point, but discarded the idea because it seems >> to convey the wrong message: >> We're moving the include files because they are architecture independent, >> and referring to an architecture name in the path feels a bit odd. Or maybe >> arm-common? > > As I wrote in the other message, Linux in general has a shallow include/ > tree, so I think putting them in include/kvm/ is good. > > Is there any precedent for naming stuff that is common to arm and > aarch64? So far, we have: - include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic.h - include/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.h So the trend seems to use "arm" as a prefix, and I will rename the files to match this convention (which you actually suggested in your other email). > I think to 99% of the world they will both be "arm", but of > course the remaining 1% is likely over-represented among KVM-ARM > maintainers. :) Who? What? ;-) Do you have any comment about patch 2/2? It is a bit more invasive, but it is a cleanup in my opinion. Thanks for the feedback, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] ARM: KVM: move GIC/timer code to a common location Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 09:46:29 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <518CB3E5.7090504@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <518CABBB.7050909@redhat.com> On 10/05/13 09:11, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 10/05/2013 09:23, Marc Zyngier ha scritto: >>>> 1. Should we have a namespace per arch in the include directory, as in >>>> include/kvm/arm? >> So I thought of that at one point, but discarded the idea because it seems >> to convey the wrong message: >> We're moving the include files because they are architecture independent, >> and referring to an architecture name in the path feels a bit odd. Or maybe >> arm-common? > > As I wrote in the other message, Linux in general has a shallow include/ > tree, so I think putting them in include/kvm/ is good. > > Is there any precedent for naming stuff that is common to arm and > aarch64? So far, we have: - include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic.h - include/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.h So the trend seems to use "arm" as a prefix, and I will rename the files to match this convention (which you actually suggested in your other email). > I think to 99% of the world they will both be "arm", but of > course the remaining 1% is likely over-represented among KVM-ARM > maintainers. :) Who? What? ;-) Do you have any comment about patch 2/2? It is a bit more invasive, but it is a cleanup in my opinion. Thanks for the feedback, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-10 8:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-05-03 14:02 [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: KVM: Moving GIC/timer out of arch/arm Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 14:02 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 14:02 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] ARM: KVM: move GIC/timer code to a common location Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 14:02 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-09 18:11 ` Christoffer Dall 2013-05-09 18:11 ` Christoffer Dall 2013-05-10 7:23 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-10 7:23 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-10 8:09 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-05-10 8:09 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-05-10 8:11 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-05-10 8:11 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-05-10 8:46 ` Marc Zyngier [this message] 2013-05-10 8:46 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 14:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] ARM: KVM: standalone Makefile for vgic and timers Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 14:02 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-10 9:39 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-05-10 9:39 ` Paolo Bonzini 2013-05-10 9:59 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-10 9:59 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 15:31 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: KVM: Moving GIC/timer out of arch/arm Anup Patel 2013-05-03 15:31 ` Anup Patel 2013-05-03 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-03 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier 2013-05-12 9:03 ` Gleb Natapov 2013-05-12 9:03 ` Gleb Natapov 2013-05-12 10:23 ` Catalin Marinas 2013-05-12 10:23 ` Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=518CB3E5.7090504@arm.com \ --to=marc.zyngier@arm.com \ --cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \ --cc=cdall@cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=gleb@redhat.com \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.