Re: [PATCH 7/7] [v2] drivers/misc: introduce Freescale hypervisor management driver

Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > I don't think it's correct to think of a hypervisor as firmware, so I don't
>> > think drivers/firmware is better.
>> > 
>> > I'm not sure that creating virt/fsl and putting the driver in there is a good
>> > idea, because it will be the only driver in that directory.  Unlike KVM, this
>> > driver is just a collection of front-ends to our hypervisor API.  The actual
>> > hypervisor is completely separate.  That's why I put it in drivers/misc, because
>> > it's just a single driver with a miscellaneous collection of interfaces.

> Ok, fair enough. If nobody has a strong preference any other way, just make it
> drivers/firmware then.

Did you mean to say drivers/misc?

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale