From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759498AbXKZQxy (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:53:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757213AbXKZQxp (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:53:45 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.169]:63853 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755983AbXKZQxn (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:53:43 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from; b=hlT7xwvXr2RISqxzNYZuqvS3DiAJqTOT0v4WE8cUOP6rjIAt2f8d9NPkekgqpaCudi5NTlKobK6LNV/s0YfecbtvH1mhF8ZrL33BxcWXDZjvFQX54CEDupjX2CVNQInMCruwuAxmT1qbpKe/0P+ks9pW0WvcfTILfbtc3vFBmwI= Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:53:39 +0100 To: "Dmitry Torokhov" Cc: "Paul Mundt" , "Kristoffer Ericson" , "Russell King" , linux-main Subject: Re: Question regarding naming scheme (HP Jornada 6XX/7XX) Message-Id: <20071126175339.5e8fa5b4.Kristoffer.ericson@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20071126000329.8e7304c5.Kristoffer.ericson@gmail.com> <20071126043030.GA25664@linux-sh.org> Organization: JLime X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Kristoffer Ericson Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:40:14 -0500 "Dmitry Torokhov" wrote: > On Nov 25, 2007 11:30 PM, Paul Mundt wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 12:03:29AM +0100, Kristoffer Ericson wrote: > > > > > Why I want to use 600-series/700-series instead of 6XX/7XX is simply > > > because 600-series/700-series leaves no doubt. > > > > > Apparently your end users are more technically apt than I am, as I have > > no idea how using 00 over XX makes things any less ambiguous. > > > > We already have a 6xx mach-type that drivers can set their dependency on. > > If it's not 680-only, then that's a perfectly reasonable dependency. Feel > > free to change the Kconfig text to make the description more useful, but > > please don't start idly shuffling around code and symbols because users > > can't work out why a driver is available that they can't support. > > Agreed. Users simply should not care what a particular module is > called. If Kconfig entries and/or its help is unclear on whta devices > are supported by the drivers let's fix that. > Ok, guess the idea was shot down then :). I'll look at Kconfigs to see how I can make it clearer. thx for feedback. > -- > Dmitry