Re: Location of PIC modules

[Allen Briggs <briggs%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 02:17:14PM -0400, Michael Lorenz wrote:
> ( and nothing's set in stone here either - I don't have strong  
> feelings about PIC drivers' locations but I don't see any compelling  
> reason to move them around )

I don't think it matters so much for ppc, but for some other archs, it
may not be clear which archs would need to be updated if you were to
make an API change.  All(?) PPC archs are somethingppc, and that's
not likely to change.  Oops.  What about ibmnws?  Might miss that
one.

I don't care so much myself, but I can see both sides.

It makes sense to keep MD code separate from MI code.
It makes sense to keep the API users in one spot for consistency to
ensure that everything gets updated properly when things change.
Although you could keep a list of PPC ports in the file or in the
(ahem) documentation of the MI code and MD requirements.

-allen

-- 
Allen Briggs  |  http://www.ninthwonder.com/~briggs/  |  
briggs%ninthwonder.com@localhost