[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070322080356.738b7a1e.khali@linux-fr.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 08:03:56 +0100
From: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To: "Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@...il.com>
Cc: "Bob Copeland" <me@...copeland.com>, bryan.wu@...log.com,
"David Brownell" <david-b@...bell.net>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 4/4] Blackfin: on-chip Two Wire Interface I2C driver
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:14:29 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 3/21/07, Bob Copeland <me@...copeland.com> wrote:
> > > +config I2C_BLACKFIN_TWI
> > > + tristate "Blackfin TWI I2C support"
> > > + depends on I2C && (BF534 || BF536 || BF537)
> > > + help
> > > + This is the TWI I2C device driver for Blackfin 534/536/537.
> > > + This driver can also be built as a module. If so, the module
> > > + will be called i2c-bfin-twi.
> >
> > Pardon my ignorance, but is there any reason to call it "Blackfin TWI"
> > as opposed to just "Blackfin" since TWI and I2C mean the same thing?
> > It lends itself to some redundancies such as:
> >
> > > + pr_info("I2C: Blackfin I2C TWI driver\n");
>
> it reflects the hardware manual and all public Analog Devices
> documentation ... the peripheral is always referred to as a "Two Wire
> Interface that is fully compatible with the I2C standard" since using
> the "I2C" term is not free
Damn, I hate it when legal idiocy takes the lead on technical clarity :(
--
Jean Delvare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists