From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] net: dsa: Add support for hardware monitoring Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 10:26:06 -0700 Message-ID: <544BDD2E.6010604@gmail.com> References: <54488CE1.2000106@roeck-us.net> <20141023134706.GB25190@lunn.ch> <20141023162754.GA21343@roeck-us.net> <20141023165459.GE25190@lunn.ch> <20141023173847.GA22988@roeck-us.net> <20141023180357.GG25190@lunn.ch> <20141023184322.GA24281@roeck-us.net> <20141023195526.GH25190@lunn.ch> <20141024161919.GA29600@roeck-us.net> <20141025140116.GA12051@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: netdev , "David S. Miller" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" To: Andrew Lunn , Guenter Roeck Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141025140116.GA12051@lunn.ch> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 10/25/14 07:01, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> Here is another naming option: >> >> em1dsa0-virtual-0 > > I prefer this over isa. > > However, i think there should be some sort of separator between the > network device name and dsa. Considering that network devices can be renamed, do we want it to be included in the sensor name at all? -- Florian