Re: UIO device name

Joakim Tjernlund
2008-09-25T12:36:23Z

On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 20:53 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 01:41:08PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 20:48 +1000, Ben Nizette wrote:
> > > UIO is an interface type, not a bus type. UIO isn't a subsystem as
> > > such, it's a user interface. If the interface is consistent (even if
> > > the backing device is different) I don't see the problem with consistent
> > > naming.
> >
> > Do you see a problem with letting the protocol driver choose another
> > one? Why not offer the user the chance to let the name mean something?
> >
> This thread is still going? Amazing. Anyways, your protocol driver
> argument doesn't make any sense. Take the case of uio_pdrv or the genirq
> variant. This is the name it hands off to the core, while the devices
> that register underneath it all have their own names set. Go grep for all
> instances of uio_pdrv platform data in the architecture code. I'm getting
> the impression you haven't actually even bothered to look at the name
> entries.

Thanks for your kind words. It is true that I am not an expert in this
area, just trying to understand and improve. Obviously I still lack
some knowledge but now I am done with uio's interface naming, I will
just scan sysfs for it.

Jocke