linux-kernel - Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/4] SoC base drivers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1068016897.20070501173657@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 May 2007 17:36:57 +0300
From:	Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@...il.com>
To:	Dmitry Krivoschekov <dmitry.krivoschekov@...il.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
	<kernel-discuss@...dhelds.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/4] SoC base drivers

Hello Dmitry,

Tuesday, May 1, 2007, 4:53:09 PM, you wrote:

> Hi Paul,

> Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
>> In contemporary systems, lots of functionality oftentimes handled by various
>> kinds of SoCs (system-on-chip), representing a number of deversified
>> controllers packaged in one chip. 

> I think your referring to the term "SoC (system-on-chip)" is confusing
> (at least for me). You rather consider companion chips than SoCs.

> Yes, any chip integrating a number of controllers could be considered
> as a system-on-chip but if the chip doesn't make sense without
> some master chip (processor) I'd consider the chip as a companion
> (to the processor) chip.

        Ditto for me - I find "companion" thing confusing. What's
important for the RFC/topic discussed is that it is integrated
controller with many diversified functions, not what it is helper to
something. I understand that for many people SoC means CPU with ties,
but IMHO, it's less stretch to take such chip, remove CPU, and still
call it a SoC, than call an integrated audio/touchscreen controller a
companion chip (well, of course it is; and RAM chip too ;-) ).

        Either way, I don't pledge to be a HW designer with
contemporary lexicon. The aim was simple - as a single word would be
too ambiguous, general, or vice-versa, omitting, then acronym is
needed, hopefully existing, and not new, and SoC is the most fitting
TLA, IMHO. But I'm open to specific suggestions for improvement. For
example, if I was to write a Documentation/ entry for that, I'd mention
companion chips, peripheral/integrated controllers, etc. But renaming
drivers/soc/ to drivers/companion/ would be more confusing, as the
concept described is not tied to companion chips per se (even though
many of chips we (handhelds.org) deal with, can be classified as
such).


> Regards,
> Dmitry


-- 
Best regards,
 Paul                            mailto:pmiscml@...il.com

-
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/