On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:17:29PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote: > From: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> > Signed-off-by: Bharata B Rao <bhar...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
So, how to organize this generically is still under discussion. For
now, I don't think this generic outline is really worth it. In any
case I can't really take it through my tree.
What I'd suggest instead is just implementing the POWER core device in
the ppc specific code. As the generic socket vs. core vs. whatever
stuff clarifies, that POWER core device might become a "virtual
socket" or CM or whatever, but I think we'll be able to keep the
external interface compatible with the right use of aliases.
In the meantime it should at least give us a draft we can experiment
with on Power without requiring new generic infrastructure.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
pgplauIJ7e9kq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
