From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: OMAP4 naming conventions Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 07:58:45 -0700 Message-ID: <87tz3qe5ay.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.172]:52725 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752038AbZELO6r (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 10:58:47 -0400 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 26so18854wfd.4 for ; Tue, 12 May 2009 07:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Cc: Santosh Shilimkar 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? Kevin