Re: [PATCH 1/2] usb: rename 'phy' field of 'struct usb_hcd' to 'transceiver'

[Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>]

On 04/09/2014 08:48 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:

>>>> Return to the 'phy' field of 'struct usb_hcd' its historic name
>>>> 'transceiver'.
>>>> This is in preparation to adding the generic PHY support.

>>> Surely if the correct term is transceiver, we should be adding generic
>>> transceiver support not generic PHY support? To be honest, this rename
>>> feels like churn, especially since the APIs and DT bindings all still
>>> include the work phy so now everything will be inconsistent.

>>     How about 'usb_phy'?

> That certainly would make things more consistent, but I wonder why
> "usb_phy" is better than "phy" when the code/struct in question is
> something USB-specific; the "usb_" prefix seems implicit to me due to
> context.

    I tend to agree. However, I need to name the new field of stype 'struct 
phy *' somehow... perhaps something like 'gen_phy' for it would do?

WBR, Sergei