From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751783AbaANS6N (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:58:13 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:42016 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750751AbaANS6I (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:58:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 19:58:02 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com, tglx@linutronix.de, bp@suse.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:x86/microcode] x86, microcode: Move to a proper location Message-ID: <20140114185802.GB29871@pd.tnic> References: <52D56174.9010608@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52D56174.9010608@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 08:10:28AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Quite frankly I would be much happier if we didn't stash so much under > arch/x86/kernel/cpu ... quite frankly it feels like almost *anything* > could go under there. The microcode code, for example, could go under > its own subtree. Yeah, about the microcode, shouldn't it be under kernel/cpu/? My train of thought is: because it is cpu-related functionality, it logically belongs there. Or do we rather apply the shallow tree logic of arch/x86/microcode arch/x86/events ... ? I have to say, arch/x86/kernel/cpu/ is kinda long and hard to remember so the shallow structure should be nicer on the eyes and the brain :) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --