From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Khalid Aziz Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 15:01:03 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc64: Add ADI capability to cpu capabilities Message-Id: <56717CAF.3090003@oracle.com> List-Id: References: <1449097600-23288-1-git-send-email-khalid.aziz@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <1449097600-23288-1-git-send-email-khalid.aziz@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org On 12/15/2015 08:13 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Khalid Aziz > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:25:42 -0700 > >> adi is the externally visible name for this feature and that is how it >> is referenced in the docs. Firmware encodes it as "adp" for its >> internal use and that is how it shows up in hwcap-list property. So >> this code translates it from firmware internal name to the external >> name which would make sense to someone looking at /proc/cpuinfo. > > I totally disagree with changing the string. > > If the firmware provides X that's what we should publish in the > cap list. It doesn't really matter what the docs say. > > Otherwise we have this rediculous set of translations whenever > something like this pops up again, and that kind of crud tends > to accumulate. > It is a marketing/copyright thing, but I agree with you :) Let me check with marketing if they are ok with not doing the translation. Thanks, Khalid