Subject: Use of drivers/platform and matching include?

From: [email-masked] (Catalin Marinas)
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 13:03:25 +0100

On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 12:43:40PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 10:09:14AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 09:46:30AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > I don't have a good answer though. If it wasn't for the arm64 fork,
> > > locating these under arch/arm somewhere would really be the reasonable
> > > answer, like we used to do on powerpc. :(
> > 
> > Sounds like yet-another-good reason why there shouldn't be an arm64
> > "fork" at all :(
> > 
> > The arm community created this mess, you all can fix it up, it's not too
> > late.
> 
> I said at the time, way before arm64 was merged that it should not be a
> separate arch.  Every bit of feedback I gave on arm64 got shouted down
> by Catalin.  ARM64 is Catalin's baby and he wants to protect it at all
> costs.

My counter arguments weren't probably clear to you. I want to protect a
clean, legacy-free AArch64 implementation at all costs.

-- 
Catalin