All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rohit Vaswani <rvaswani-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Kumar Gala <galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: David Brown <davidb-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring-bsGFqQB8/DxBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>,
	Ian Campbell
	<ijc+devicetree-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>,
	Russell King <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>,
	"devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
	<devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	"linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org list"
	<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	"linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:28:33 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52374DD1.9040209@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9EA264FE-7621-458D-8333-9340DDBFC4EE-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>

On 9/12/2013 7:05 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2013, at 5:47 PM, David Brown wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:55:36PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>> My original request to please use a common prefix for your product
>>>> families stands. Please prefix with msm-*, or if you have to, qcom-*
>>>> instead, since you guys can't seem to make your mind up on standard
>>>> prefixes (msm, apq, etc).
>>> This is silly, I dont see the reason to go with
>>> qcom-apq<SOC>-<BOARD>.dts and than in the future drop qcom- when we
>>> mostly likely shift to a dir structure.  As engineers we are all too
>>> aware of the lack of sanity in marketing names, but its what we have
>>> so we have to live with it.
>> At least what we'd decided a year or two ago was to call _everything_
>> with an msm* prefix.  If marketing comes up with cute prefixes for
>> things, we would basically ignore them.  So, under that, it should be
>> an msm8074-dragonboard.  Admittedly, it might be a little confusing
>> with the name of the product having the apq in it, but as others have
>> pointed out, I think there is less confusing than not having a common
>> prefix on our MSM products.
>>
>> At least so far, there are no chips where apq vs msm actually
>> distinguishes anything.  In fact, a simple "decoder ring" would point
>> out that the 'apq' usually corresponds with the second digit being a
>> zero.  It doesn't help that we've added an 'mpq' prefix as well.
>>
>> I don't really see how to satisfy all of this other than qcom-apq*, or
>> just continue to use msm*.

I think going ahead with what David mentioned  for msm* works if we can 
be consistent or if we want to explicitly mention apq in the file name, 
then
we can rename them to be qcom-msm* or qcom-apq* if people care about the 
differences between them.

>
> I think msm has run out of steam, especially as more SoCs come out of Qualcomm that aren't just targeting phones & tablets.
>
> - k
>


Thanks,
Rohit Vaswani

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: rvaswani@codeaurora.org (Rohit Vaswani)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:28:33 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52374DD1.9040209@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9EA264FE-7621-458D-8333-9340DDBFC4EE@codeaurora.org>

On 9/12/2013 7:05 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2013, at 5:47 PM, David Brown wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:55:36PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>> My original request to please use a common prefix for your product
>>>> families stands. Please prefix with msm-*, or if you have to, qcom-*
>>>> instead, since you guys can't seem to make your mind up on standard
>>>> prefixes (msm, apq, etc).
>>> This is silly, I dont see the reason to go with
>>> qcom-apq<SOC>-<BOARD>.dts and than in the future drop qcom- when we
>>> mostly likely shift to a dir structure.  As engineers we are all too
>>> aware of the lack of sanity in marketing names, but its what we have
>>> so we have to live with it.
>> At least what we'd decided a year or two ago was to call _everything_
>> with an msm* prefix.  If marketing comes up with cute prefixes for
>> things, we would basically ignore them.  So, under that, it should be
>> an msm8074-dragonboard.  Admittedly, it might be a little confusing
>> with the name of the product having the apq in it, but as others have
>> pointed out, I think there is less confusing than not having a common
>> prefix on our MSM products.
>>
>> At least so far, there are no chips where apq vs msm actually
>> distinguishes anything.  In fact, a simple "decoder ring" would point
>> out that the 'apq' usually corresponds with the second digit being a
>> zero.  It doesn't help that we've added an 'mpq' prefix as well.
>>
>> I don't really see how to satisfy all of this other than qcom-apq*, or
>> just continue to use msm*.

I think going ahead with what David mentioned  for msm* works if we can 
be consistent or if we want to explicitly mention apq in the file name, 
then
we can rename them to be qcom-msm* or qcom-apq* if people care about the 
differences between them.

>
> I think msm has run out of steam, especially as more SoCs come out of Qualcomm that aren't just targeting phones & tablets.
>
> - k
>


Thanks,
Rohit Vaswani

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rohit Vaswani <rvaswani@codeaurora.org>
To: Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>
Cc: David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org list"
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:28:33 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52374DD1.9040209@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9EA264FE-7621-458D-8333-9340DDBFC4EE@codeaurora.org>

On 9/12/2013 7:05 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2013, at 5:47 PM, David Brown wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:55:36PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>> My original request to please use a common prefix for your product
>>>> families stands. Please prefix with msm-*, or if you have to, qcom-*
>>>> instead, since you guys can't seem to make your mind up on standard
>>>> prefixes (msm, apq, etc).
>>> This is silly, I dont see the reason to go with
>>> qcom-apq<SOC>-<BOARD>.dts and than in the future drop qcom- when we
>>> mostly likely shift to a dir structure.  As engineers we are all too
>>> aware of the lack of sanity in marketing names, but its what we have
>>> so we have to live with it.
>> At least what we'd decided a year or two ago was to call _everything_
>> with an msm* prefix.  If marketing comes up with cute prefixes for
>> things, we would basically ignore them.  So, under that, it should be
>> an msm8074-dragonboard.  Admittedly, it might be a little confusing
>> with the name of the product having the apq in it, but as others have
>> pointed out, I think there is less confusing than not having a common
>> prefix on our MSM products.
>>
>> At least so far, there are no chips where apq vs msm actually
>> distinguishes anything.  In fact, a simple "decoder ring" would point
>> out that the 'apq' usually corresponds with the second digit being a
>> zero.  It doesn't help that we've added an 'mpq' prefix as well.
>>
>> I don't really see how to satisfy all of this other than qcom-apq*, or
>> just continue to use msm*.

I think going ahead with what David mentioned  for msm* works if we can 
be consistent or if we want to explicitly mention apq in the file name, 
then
we can rename them to be qcom-msm* or qcom-apq* if people care about the 
differences between them.

>
> I think msm has run out of steam, especially as more SoCs come out of Qualcomm that aren't just targeting phones & tablets.
>
> - k
>


Thanks,
Rohit Vaswani

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-09-16 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-12 16:37 [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 16:37 ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 16:46 ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 16:46   ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 16:53   ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 16:53     ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 17:06     ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 17:06       ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 17:55       ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 17:55         ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 18:04         ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 18:04           ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 18:15           ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 18:15             ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 18:15             ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 18:20             ` Rob Herring
2013-09-12 18:20               ` Rob Herring
2013-09-12 18:46               ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 18:46                 ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-12 19:26                 ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-12 19:26                   ` Kumar Gala
     [not found]         ` <3E38F48E-EE41-4564-84A1-36CF07B08811-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-09-12 22:47           ` David Brown
2013-09-12 22:47             ` David Brown
2013-09-12 22:47             ` David Brown
2013-09-13  2:05             ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-13  2:05               ` Kumar Gala
     [not found]               ` <9EA264FE-7621-458D-8333-9340DDBFC4EE-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-09-16 18:28                 ` Rohit Vaswani [this message]
2013-09-16 18:28                   ` Rohit Vaswani
2013-09-16 18:28                   ` Rohit Vaswani
     [not found]                   ` <52374DD1.9040209-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-09-16 18:46                     ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-16 18:46                       ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-16 18:46                       ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-16 18:50                       ` Olof Johansson
2013-09-16 18:50                         ` Olof Johansson
     [not found]                         ` <CAOesGMgCvnuX918pt6vT0_QsHdfJ8b813iu2tXRHvdpL8GZ3dg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2013-09-17 15:52                           ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-17 15:52                             ` Kumar Gala
2013-09-17 15:52                             ` Kumar Gala

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=52374DD1.9040209@codeaurora.org \
    --to=rvaswani-sgv2jx0feol9jmxxk+q4oq@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=davidb-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=ijc+devicetree-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=rob.herring-bsGFqQB8/DxBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.