Re: [RFC][PATCH 03/10] bcma: add embedded bus

["Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>]

On 06/06/2011 12:51 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> W dniu 6 czerwca 2011 12:32 użytkownik George Kashperko
> <george@znau.edu.ua>  napisał:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> Hauke,
>>>
>>> My idea for naming schema was to use:
>>> bcma_host_TYPE_*
>>>
>>> Like:
>>> bcma_host_pci_*
>>> bcma_host_sdio_*
>>>
>>> You are using:
>>> bcma_host_bcma_*
>>>
>>> What do you think about changing this to:
>>> bcma_host_embedded_*
>>> or just some:
>>> bcma_host_emb_*
>>> ?
>>>
>>> Does it make more sense to you? I was trying to keep names in bcma
>>> really clear, so every first-time-reader can see differences between
>>> hosts, host and driver, etc.
>> how about bcma_host_soc ?
> We get then inconsistency with "BCMA_HOSTTYPE_EMBEDDED". I'd like to
> 1) See something like bcma_host_emb...
> xor
> 2) Use bcma_host_soc_* and BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SOC
>

I would go for option 2). It more clearly says what it is. Embedded is a 
broader term. As an example, a handset is an embedded device, but it may 
use BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SDIO.

Gr. AvS

-- 
Almost nobody dances sober, unless they happen to be insane.
-- H.P. Lovecraft --