Re: [PATCH 1/2] usb: rename 'phy' field of 'struct usb_hcd' to 'transceiver'

[Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>]

On 04/09/2014 09:37 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:

>>>>>> Return to the 'phy' field of 'struct usb_hcd' its historic name
>>>>>> 'transceiver'.
>>>>>> This is in preparation to adding the generic PHY support.

>>>>> Surely if the correct term is transceiver, we should be adding generic
>>>>> transceiver support not generic PHY support? To be honest, this rename
>>>>> feels like churn, especially since the APIs and DT bindings all still
>>>>> include the work phy so now everything will be inconsistent.

>>>>      How about 'usb_phy'?

>>> That certainly would make things more consistent, but I wonder why
>>> "usb_phy" is better than "phy" when the code/struct in question is
>>> something USB-specific; the "usb_" prefix seems implicit to me due to
>>> context.

>>     I tend to agree. However, I need to name the new field of stype
>> 'struct phy *' somehow... perhaps something like 'gen_phy' for it would do?

> Ok, the existing field is being replaced by something? I didn't get that

    No, not replaced. I'm adding the support for generic PHY to the existing 
USB PHY support. I thought that was clear from the changelog.

> from the patch description; I thought the new name in this patch was
> going to be it. In that case, a temporary name of usb_phy for the
> existing field, or adding the new field as gen_phy sound reasonable.

    OK, I'll respin the patch #2 with 'gen_phy' and remove the patch #1.

WBR, Sergei