Re: [RFC][PATCH 03/10] bcma: add embedded bus

["Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>]

On 06/06/2011 12:51 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> W dniu 6 czerwca 2011 12:32 użytkownik George Kashperko
> <george@znau.edu.ua>  napisał:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Hauke,
> > >
> > > My idea for naming schema was to use:
> > > bcma_host_TYPE_*
> > >
> > > Like:
> > > bcma_host_pci_*
> > > bcma_host_sdio_*
> > >
> > > You are using:
> > > bcma_host_bcma_*
> > >
> > > What do you think about changing this to:
> > > bcma_host_embedded_*
> > > or just some:
> > > bcma_host_emb_*
> > > ?
> > >
> > > Does it make more sense to you? I was trying to keep names in bcma
> > > really clear, so every first-time-reader can see differences between
> > > hosts, host and driver, etc.
> > how about bcma_host_soc ?
> We get then inconsistency with "BCMA_HOSTTYPE_EMBEDDED". I'd like to
> 1) See something like bcma_host_emb...
> xor
> 2) Use bcma_host_soc_* and BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SOC
I would go for option 2). It more clearly says what it is. Embedded is a 
broader term. As an example, a handset is an embedded device, but it may 
use BCMA_HOSTTYPE_SDIO.
Gr. AvS

--
Almost nobody dances sober, unless they happen to be insane.
-- H.P. Lovecraft --