From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Warren <biggerbadderben@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:24:28 -0700
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] net,
 fec: fix "Warning: eth device name has a space!" for FEC devices
In-Reply-To: <4C44A356.7090001@denx.de>
References: <4C4441D1.7080802@denx.de>
	<20100719185235.0F218153A81@gemini.denx.de>
	<4C44A356.7090001@denx.de>
Message-ID: <4C44A66C.5090006@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

  Hi Stefano,

On 7/19/2010 12:11 PM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
>> I always wondered why we need such a long (and slow to type) name. I
>> suggest we use this opportunity and change the name into a plain and
>> simple "FEC" resp. "SCC" and "FCC" ?
> Then probably unify the rule even for other architectures. We have a
> "FEC_MXC", too, for Freescale's i.MX processors. We can use "FEC_PPC",
> "SCC_PPC" if we want to add the architecture name (I do not think is
> useful), or better set the name to "FEC" for fec_mxc.c, too.
>
> Best regards,
> Stefano Babic
>
Unless you have a chip with both MXC and PPC FECs, which I doubt, I 
don't think the extra namespace buys anything.  Saving a few keystrokes, 
on the other hand (no pun intended) is a good thing.

regards,
Ben