From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:18:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail3.caviumnetworks.com ([12.108.191.235]:16413 "EHLO mail3.caviumnetworks.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S1492089Ab0KXRSI (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:18:08 +0100 Received: from caexch01.caveonetworks.com (Not Verified[192.168.16.9]) by mail3.caviumnetworks.com with MailMarshal (v6,7,2,8378) id ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:18:47 -0800 Received: from caexch01.caveonetworks.com ([192.168.16.9]) by caexch01.caveonetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:19:02 -0800 Received: from dd1.caveonetworks.com ([12.108.191.236]) by caexch01.caveonetworks.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:19:02 -0800 Message-ID: <4CED48CE.5060300@caviumnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:18:06 -0800 From: David Daney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Neuendorffer CC: michael@ellerman.id.au, LKML , linux-mips , microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev list , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Mega rename of device tree routines from of_*() to dt_*() References: <1290607413.12457.44.camel@concordia> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Nov 2010 17:19:02.0069 (UTC) FILETIME=[B0470E50:01CB8BFB] Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 28515 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ddaney@caviumnetworks.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On 11/24/2010 09:02 AM, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.name@lists.ozlabs.org [mailto:linuxppc-dev- >> bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.name@lists.ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of Michael Ellerman >> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:04 AM >> To: LKML >> Cc: linux-mips; microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; linuxppc-dev >> list; sparclinux@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: RFC: Mega rename of device tree routines from of_*() to dt_*() >> >> Hi all, >> >> There were some murmurings on IRC last week about renaming the of_*() >> routines. I was procrastinating at the time and said I'd have a look at >> it, so here I am. >> >> The thinking is that on many platforms that use the of_() routines >> OpenFirmware is not involved at all, this is true even on many powerpc >> platforms. Also for folks who don't know the OpenFirmware connection it >> reads as "of", as in "a can of worms". >> >> Personally I'm a bit ambivalent about it, the OF name is a bit wrong so >> it would be nice to get rid of, but it's a lot of churn. >> >> So I'm hoping people with either say "YES this is a great idea", or "NO >> this is stupid". > > Personally, I think it's a great idea, if only because I stared long and hard > at the code once upon a time trying to figure out what is really OF-related > and what isn't. It's somewhat clearer now that drivers/of has been factored > out (although, shouldn't it be drivers/dt???) > > That said, it *is* alot of code churn. If it's going to be done, I think it should be > done in concert with fixing a bunch of the function names which don't really follow any > sane naming convention, so that the backporting discontinuity only happens once. > Oh, you mean things like: of_{,un}register_platform_driver vs. platform_driver_{,un}register That one is particularly annoying to me. David Daney From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail3.caviumnetworks.com (mail3.caviumnetworks.com [12.108.191.235]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B80AB70A8 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 04:18:07 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <4CED48CE.5060300@caviumnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:18:06 -0800 From: David Daney MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Neuendorffer Subject: Re: Mega rename of device tree routines from of_*() to dt_*() References: <1290607413.12457.44.camel@concordia> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Cc: linux-mips , microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, LKML , linuxppc-dev list , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 11/24/2010 09:02 AM, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.name@lists.ozlabs.org [mailto:linuxppc-dev- >> bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.name@lists.ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of Michael Ellerman >> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:04 AM >> To: LKML >> Cc: linux-mips; microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; linuxppc-dev >> list; sparclinux@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: RFC: Mega rename of device tree routines from of_*() to dt_*() >> >> Hi all, >> >> There were some murmurings on IRC last week about renaming the of_*() >> routines. I was procrastinating at the time and said I'd have a look at >> it, so here I am. >> >> The thinking is that on many platforms that use the of_() routines >> OpenFirmware is not involved at all, this is true even on many powerpc >> platforms. Also for folks who don't know the OpenFirmware connection it >> reads as "of", as in "a can of worms". >> >> Personally I'm a bit ambivalent about it, the OF name is a bit wrong so >> it would be nice to get rid of, but it's a lot of churn. >> >> So I'm hoping people with either say "YES this is a great idea", or "NO >> this is stupid". > > Personally, I think it's a great idea, if only because I stared long and hard > at the code once upon a time trying to figure out what is really OF-related > and what isn't. It's somewhat clearer now that drivers/of has been factored > out (although, shouldn't it be drivers/dt???) > > That said, it *is* alot of code churn. If it's going to be done, I think it should be > done in concert with fixing a bunch of the function names which don't really follow any > sane naming convention, so that the backporting discontinuity only happens once. > Oh, you mean things like: of_{,un}register_platform_driver vs. platform_driver_{,un}register That one is particularly annoying to me. David Daney From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Daney Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:18:06 +0000 Subject: Re: Mega rename of device tree routines from of_*() to dt_*() Message-Id: <4CED48CE.5060300@caviumnetworks.com> List-Id: References: <1290607413.12457.44.camel@concordia> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Stephen Neuendorffer Cc: linux-mips , microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, LKML , linuxppc-dev list , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org On 11/24/2010 09:02 AM, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.name@lists.ozlabs.org [mailto:linuxppc-dev- >> bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.name@lists.ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of Michael Ellerman >> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:04 AM >> To: LKML >> Cc: linux-mips; microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; linuxppc-dev >> list; sparclinux@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: RFC: Mega rename of device tree routines from of_*() to dt_*() >> >> Hi all, >> >> There were some murmurings on IRC last week about renaming the of_*() >> routines. I was procrastinating at the time and said I'd have a look at >> it, so here I am. >> >> The thinking is that on many platforms that use the of_() routines >> OpenFirmware is not involved at all, this is true even on many powerpc >> platforms. Also for folks who don't know the OpenFirmware connection it >> reads as "of", as in "a can of worms". >> >> Personally I'm a bit ambivalent about it, the OF name is a bit wrong so >> it would be nice to get rid of, but it's a lot of churn. >> >> So I'm hoping people with either say "YES this is a great idea", or "NO >> this is stupid". > > Personally, I think it's a great idea, if only because I stared long and hard > at the code once upon a time trying to figure out what is really OF-related > and what isn't. It's somewhat clearer now that drivers/of has been factored > out (although, shouldn't it be drivers/dt???) > > That said, it *is* alot of code churn. If it's going to be done, I think it should be > done in concert with fixing a bunch of the function names which don't really follow any > sane naming convention, so that the backporting discontinuity only happens once. > Oh, you mean things like: of_{,un}register_platform_driver vs. platform_driver_{,un}register That one is particularly annoying to me. David Daney