[Arm-netbook] [advice sought] EOMA68 kernel support

lkcl luke luke.leighton at gmail.com
Sat Mar 10 13:32:16 GMT 2012

forwarding original message kindly sent by alan (thank you! and
apologies i forgot to mention that arm-netbook is subscriber only)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:  <arm-netbook-bounces at lists.phcomp.co.uk>
Date: Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM
Subject: Auto-discard notification
To: arm-netbook-owner at lists.phcomp.co.uk

The attached message has been automatically discarded.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: lkcl luke <luke.leighton at gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org>, Linux on
small ARM machines <arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 13:00:55 +0000
Subject: Re: [advice sought] EOMA68 kernel support
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 06:45:15 +0000
lkcl luke <luke.leighton at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:41 PM, lkcl luke <luke.leighton at gmail.com> wrote:
> > the implications of that split, for the linux kernel source code, are
> > a bit... scarey :)
>  ... so, real simple very basic, concrete and necessary question:
> where the hell in the linux kernel tree should support for eoma68 be
> added??

It sounds to me like a bus.

>  * driver support can't be added to drivers/ because although a device
> with an EOMA68 CPU card *requires* drivers, it's not *actual* drivers
> being added, it's driver *grouping* code that's required, and that
> concept simply does... not... exist.

Actually we stick busses in drivers too (see pci...)

>  * architecture support can't be added to arch/ because that contains
> code for CPUs not code that is about helping to support multiple CPUs.
>  eoma isn't a CPU.

See above.. it's a bus

> very basic question.  where the hell should EOMA support source code go?
> bearing in mind that the first CPU card is an Allwinner A10, the next
> one is likely to be an AMD Fusion, the one after that could be from
> icubecorp, the one after that a multi-core SMP xtensa, etc.

Off the top of my head I suspect you want


which is the bus interface and glue including reading the device tree
data for the current board you are plugged into and building a device
tree from that.


or some similar name, which is the library routines everything using
eoma68 needs


probably the platform code for each system.

I don't btw see the problem with your device trees and display. If you've
got a device tree on *both* the CPU card and the I/O boards then you've
got all the data in the right places.


More information about the arm-netbook mailing list