* CPM2 vs PQ2: The Naming Issue
@ 2005-06-15 15:18 Jason McMullan
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Jason McMullan @ 2005-06-15 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 574 bytes --]
I think the issue with naming is that there are people that consider the
'part name' to be CPM2 (the macrocell), and other consider the
'part name' to be the whole SoC.
Both are valid concepts, I just tend to go towards the macrocell
side of the fence.
If we consider the CPM2 to be a 'part' that dispenses other 'parts',
we could actually consider the CPM2 to be a bus-type object.
Hmm. I kinda like that, actually. (But then, I'm a crazy nutball)
--
Jason McMullan <jason.mcmullan@gmail.com>
"Sure, send me the latest Knoppix DVD as an attachment..."
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2005-06-15 15:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-06-15 15:18 CPM2 vs PQ2: The Naming Issue Jason McMullan
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox