RE: [PATCH 09/15] Despecificate driver from iLO2

Mingarelli, Thomas
2010-08-04T20:20:51Z

I like that suggestion Wim. Sure would make future iLO releases easier to include.

Tom

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wim Van Sebroeck [mailto:wim@iguana.be]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 3:14 PM
> To: Frazier, Daniel Kent (ProLiant Linux)
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Mingarelli, Thomas
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/15] Despecificate driver from iLO2
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> > This driver supports both iLO2 and iLO3, but our user-visible strings
> > currently only reference iLO2. Let's just call it "iLO" to avoid having
> > to update strings for each iLO generation. This driver doesn't support
> > iLO ASICs prior to iLO2, but that is sufficiently explained in Kconfig.
>
> Just a thought: Wouldn't it be more consistent if it's called iLO2+
> everywhere?
>
> > - tristate "HP Proliant iLO 2 Hardware Watchdog Timer"
> > + tristate "HP Proliant iLO Hardware Watchdog Timer"
>
> would be: tristate "HP Proliant iLO2+ Hardware Watchdog Timer"
>
> > - .identity = "HP iLO2 HW Watchdog Timer",
> > + .identity = "HP iLO HW Watchdog Timer",
>
> and: .identity = "HP iLO2+ HW Watchdog Timer",
>
> > - * First let's find out if we are on an iLO2 server. We will
> > + * First let's find out if we are on an iLO2+ server. We will
>
> > - dev_warn(&dev->dev,
> > - "This server does not have an iLO2 ASIC.\n");
> > + dev_warn(&dev->dev, "This server does not have an iLO ASIC"
> > + " version 2 or greater.\n");
>
> dev_warn(&dev->dev,
> "This server does not have an iLO2+ ASIC.\n");
>
> > - "Unable to detect the iLO2 server memory.\n");
> > + "Unable to detect the iLO server memory.\n");
>
> "Unable to detect the iLO2+ server memory.\n");
>
> For the rest I'm still reviewing the code.
>
> Kind regards,
> Wim.