Re: [PATCH v2] tools/firmware: add ACPI device for Windows laptop/slate mode switch

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@suse.com]
> Sent: 24 March 2017 11:33
> To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>; Ian Jackson
> <Ian.Jackson@citrix.com>; Owen Smith <owen.smith@citrix.com>; Wei Liu
> <wei.liu2@citrix.com>; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] tools/firmware: add ACPI device for Windows
> laptop/slate mode switch
> 
> >>> On 24.03.17 at 12:19, <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>  -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@suse.com]
> >> Sent: 24 March 2017 11:16
> >> To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>
> >> Cc: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>; Ian Jackson
> >> <Ian.Jackson@citrix.com>; Owen Smith <owen.smith@citrix.com>; Wei
> Liu
> >> <wei.liu2@citrix.com>; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
> >> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] tools/firmware: add ACPI device for Windows
> >> laptop/slate mode switch
> >>
> >> >>> On 24.03.17 at 12:04, <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com> wrote:
> >> >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@suse.com]
> >> >> Sent: 24 March 2017 10:53
> >> >> The only other concern I have here is that the abbreviation "conv"
> >> >> used throughout the patch is sort of ambiguous. I think it means
> >> >> "convertible" here, but without knowing the context it could easily
> >> >> be "conventional" or "convenience". Would there be anything
> >> >> wrong with spelling it out wherever name length limitations don't
> >> >> require it to be just four characters?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I thought that name would be ok since it is the name of the ACPI device
> >> > itself but I could extend the xl.cfg option, bool and flag names to
> >> > 'acpi_convert' to make it more obvious.
> >>
> >> Hmm, "convert" still leaves room for speculation (in particular, seeing
> >> an option with this name, I'd suspect it wants to convert ACPI to
> >> something else). Is that what "conv" stands for (and not "convertible"
> >> or anything else)?
> >>
> >
> > It was chosen simply because of the name of the device. How about
> > 'acpi_device_conv'? After all this option merely controls the inclusion of
> > the device. Subsequent patches will have to add a PV protocol to instruct
> > in-guest code to prod it.
> 
> That name is not much better. Looking at MS doc, why don't we call
> it by the name that they use there: acpi_laptop_slate?

Ok, sounds fine. 'acpi_laptop_slate' it is.

  Paul

> 
> Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel