Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Rename scmi_{msg_,}clock_config_{get,set}_{2,21}

From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Rename scmi_{msg_,}clock_config_{get,set}_{2,21}
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 12:15:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZRQOxGmR8NQVMrwi@pluto> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230925101557.3839860-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com>

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:15:57AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> It is very confusing to use *_v2 for everything applicable until SCMI
> clock protocol version v2.0 including v1.0 for example. So let us rename
> such that *_v2 is used only for SCMI clock protocol v2.1 onwards. Also
> add comment to indicate the same explicitly.
> 

Hi Sudeep,

looking back at this, indeed, I remember being unsure if it was better
to use the v2/v21 naming scheme or the one that this patch propose.

Revisiting this now, I have to say that I agree with you, but why you
have also renamed _v21 to v2 ? The idea was to match the exact protocol
version ( I see that you added a comment anyway...)

IOW, the day some further new non-backward compatible features will be
possibly introduced (say clock v3), we could go like:

 - _config_set_v21: only v2.1 (the one you have renamed to v2)
 - _config_set_v3: only v3
 - _config_set : everything else, i.e. up to v2.0 (as you've renamed
   now)

I have no string opinions anyway, so I am fine also with this version of
the patch...better than the original brain-dead naming scheme that I had
chosen indeed :P

Thanks,
Cristian

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel