Hi Stefan,
Stefan Roese sr@denx.de writes:
On Monday 07 May 2007, Markus Klotzbücher wrote:
But I see your point. By moving those cpu-specific files into the drivers directory, the architecture custodians need to maintain files distributed all over the drivers directory and not specifically in the cpu/xxx directory. I never thought of this before.
This is why I favor the old way of storing cpu dependant drivers in the appropriate cpu directory. This makes the responsibility clear and allows to cleanly seperate arch and generic code. Isn't this similar to linux where cpu dependant drivers are found in "arch/cpu/"?
No, quite the contrary. In Linux you will find even the cpu-specific drivers (like ethernet, uart, i2c driver etc) in the "drivers" directory. Only the board- and cpu-specific setup code and some additional code like interrupt controller implementation etc is normally found in the Linux "arch" directories.
There are complete drivers in arch/ppc/8260_io or arch/ppc/8xx_io for example, but I agree you're right in general.
What do you think?
I still think we should move to implementing drivers in the drivers directory, even if the responsibility for the files is not so easily visible anymore.
Ok, if this is what was agreed upon I can live with it. (Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is a big mistake or so, I just fail to see any real benefit beside of beeing more Linux-like)
Best regards
Markus
-- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, HRB 165235 Munich, CEO: Wolfgang Denk Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany