Re: [DRIVER][RFC] SC1200 Watchdog driver

[Dave Jones]

On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 04:27:34PM +0200, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
 > Thanks Alan and Jeff for the input, i'll cleanup this stuff. Out of 
 > interest, do we normally take in patches for specialised embedded boxes? I 
 > see the AMD Elan stuff got in but that only touched one area and was easy 
 > to integrate. I presume they'd get accepted if the code was broken up into 
 > seperate modules instead of being overly specialised. For example, the 
 > CRIS stuff in the Etrax tree (developer.axis.com).

 It seems lately there has been a surge of interest in getting
 niche x86 clones included in mainline (Voyager, numaq, Elan, etc).
 I forget who it was who suggested it, but the idea came up of
 using a similar approach to arm's subarchitecture support for x86.

 The downsides would probably be a lot of code duplication,
 The upside would be hiding away specialised code from the 99% of
 people who don't need to see it.  The Voyager patch for example
 was ~150kb iirc, and was imo still quite intrusive even after
 a first round of suggestions. Putting it into arch/x86-32/voyager/
 would allow those that do care about it to do whatever they deem
 necessary without inflicting dozens of #ifdefs and the likes
 on the majority.

-- 
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs