From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A5153BBCB; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 18:57:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723661834; cv=none; b=I/EPT6YA4wKelZOStZj5Sn5Bvj0yg8Hbyd3oq19sC3iPLeFpR8RAiYApYmPu+AJYLztlMv1o9Kn2lxxpj9Uc1Y7cIA5XgLn26OousXJi56+nQiTCU09EFfcHiq99p5cj9US0RUQMBCVa+q6i5nv1Sl0kNcdkc5O8Fju+E2KjhQ8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723661834; c=relaxed/simple; bh=41ROQImH7W3DzfPl4jR8pJCPGVmQqZlJvKq8D4YNbao=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YKQR4OVc+jyMpslke/sCR5QaK/fEmjyVLBn+SX3M45uDGWDQYL771NrJfdH7ZAwJuSVWxF6PKYLsJvBNl7+V0KvWObpgB/i763JL5ec5iTnRvqPyTNtr9eHTbPhtrFoG4hAX2DNKDEEm86rf4oDotQ1Pt5ajzNMD16J32UUyVXc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: sXXZ0GkBRsG01UWmAf0Lsg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: BofapF22TH+Fsmz+80yfJw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11164"; a="24803033" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,146,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="24803033" Received: from orviesa005.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.145]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Aug 2024 11:57:12 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: GfdbACONQ4qcNb1L/q2yRA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: DvZmN/55Q8WVO6d9cFWqZw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,146,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="63985429" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orviesa005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Aug 2024 11:57:09 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from ) id 1seJBB-0000000FItG-3gmB; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 21:57:05 +0300 Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 21:57:05 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Wolfram Sang , Andi Shyti , Hans de Goede , Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= , Ilpo =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= , Paul Menzel , Wolfram Sang , eric.piel@tremplin-utc.net, Marius Hoch , Dell.Client.Kernel@dell.com, Kai Heng Feng , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/6] i2c: i801: Use a different adapter-name for IDF adapters Message-ID: References: <20240812203952.42804-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20240812203952.42804-3-hdegoede@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 08:51:52PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Hmm... algo_data by the naming seems has to be related to the algorithm, > > but AFAIU here we have simply more than one _identical_ adapters. How > > is this semantically related? > > You like the naming approach better? There are zillions of naming matching code in the kernel on different levels. TBH, I have no preferences here, but I definitely see nothing worse in this approach than in the other. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko