From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Darren Hart Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] clk: x86: Add Atom PMC platform clocks Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 14:58:19 -0800 Message-ID: <20161216225819.GA62123@f23x64.localdomain> References: <1481306510-7471-1-git-send-email-irina.tirdea@intel.com> <1481306510-7471-2-git-send-email-irina.tirdea@intel.com> <1a98dcda-a662-958e-307f-5fe3f281ed9f@linux.intel.com> <20161216183607.GB44199@f23x64.localdomain> <20161216191951.GC44199@f23x64.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart , Irina Tirdea , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, "x86@kernel.org" , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Boyd , Thomas Gleixner , Michael Turquette , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , ALSA Development Mailing List , Mark Brown , Takashi Iwai , Pierre-Louis Bossart , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 12:29:41AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 08:49:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > >> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 02:26:21AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Pierre-Louis Bossart > > >> > There should really be some Documentation about how to choose an include > >> > directory :-) > >> > >> So true! > > (1) > > > The options are: > > > > a) include/linux/x86 > > b) include/linux/platform_data/x86 > > Correct. > > > In my opinion, a) looks like architecture and would be difficult to distinguish > > from arch/x86/include. b) on the other hand clearly notes that it is for > > platform specific information. If it was platform instead of platform_data, that > > would be even better, but that could be a later change. But I think the > > confusion over x86 arch in a) is worse than the more subtle (in my opinion) > > distinction between "platform" and "platform_data". > > > > I would want x86 maintainer approval before adding a), while b) I'm happy to add > > ourselves - and we already have agreement from tglx on that. > > > > To move forward, let's go with b). > > Let me say I'm not fully satisfied, though for sake of moving forward > I agree with these arguments. > > > The new x86 directory clearly separates out > > content which will make it trivial to move later if the need arises. > > See (1). I would really appreciate if some agreement and documentation > will be developed. > In that case one of us would really have one serious argument to one > of the sides. Agreed. I always prefer to make decisions based on Documented precedent whenever possible. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center