From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:47:37 -0700 Message-ID: <20130912224737.GA24937@codeaurora.org> References: <1379003839-16068-1-git-send-email-galak@codeaurora.org> <25E0B143-658E-4CCC-A88A-0AF70FFF33CE@codeaurora.org> <3E38F48E-EE41-4564-84A1-36CF07B08811@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E38F48E-EE41-4564-84A1-36CF07B08811-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Kumar Gala Cc: Olof Johansson , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Stephen Warren , Ian Campbell , Russell King , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org list" , Rohit Vaswani , linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org 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-.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*. David -- sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. 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