From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: OMAP4 naming conventions Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 08:17:16 -0700 Message-ID: <20090512151715.GQ5593@atomide.com> References: <87tz3qe5ay.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.71]:53431 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756875AbZELPRS (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 11:17:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Premi, Sanjeev" Cc: Kevin Hilman , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "Shilimkar, Santosh" * Premi, Sanjeev [090512 08:01]: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org > > [mailto:linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Hilman > > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 8:29 PM > > To: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: Shilimkar, Santosh > > Subject: OMAP4 naming conventions > > > > As the OMAP4 patches are coming in, there seems to be a bit of variety > > in the naming of functions/macros/variables etc. > > > > Could I propose that we just use omap4_* and OMAP4_* instead of > > OMAP44XX_* or OMAP4XXXX_* etc. > > > > I know that OMAP2 and OMAP3 have a variety of forms here too, but > > those should probably be cleaned up eventually too. > > > > With proper runtime revision detecting, IMO, we should only really > > have the OMAP4 prefix, and leave the sub revision handling to runtime > > code. > > > > Thoughts? > > Full ACK. Sounds good to me too. Tony