Catalin, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm.com> wrote: > This set of patches implements the core Linux support for the AArch64 > (64-bit ARM) architecture.
Hmm. I didn't see a cc to current ARM maintainer (Russell), nor did you cc the topic list that you list in the MAINTAINERS entry. It's probably considered appropriate to do both. Also, linux-a...@vger.kernel.org usually has a cc of new architectures. > ARM introduced AArch64 as part of the ARMv8 architecture With the risk of bikeshedding here, but I find the name awkward. How about just naming the arch port arm64 instead? It's considerably more descriptive in the context of the kernel. For reference, we didn't name ppc64, nor powerpc, after what the IBM/power.org marketing people were currently calling the architecture at the time either. [...] > There is no hardware platform available at this point. From a kernel > perspective, the aim is to minimise (or even completely remove) the > platform code from the architecture specific directory. FDT is currently > mandated and there are ongoing discussions for ACPI support. This will be interesting to see how it plays out over time, and how many vendors will drop in arm64 cores on their existing designs and thus need to pull over infrastructure from arch/arm for their platform type. A lot of the drivers have moved out to common code so much of it should be possible to do cleanly, but there is still some risk for duplication. I guess it's a good chance to clean up some of it and start from a clean slate, if you can avoid the temptation of just moving over code. -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
