linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Introducing a generic AMP framework

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: <20111123161012.GA31423@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:10:14 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
Cc:	Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Introducing a generic AMP framework

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:27:31PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org> wrote:

> > Sorry for the rant, this naming just rubs me the wrong way. I definitely
> > appreciate the idea behind these patches.

> I don't share the same naming concerns you have (if any, then
> confusion with the bluetooth AMP patches and prefixes is more of a
> concern to me), but I don't care deeply about names.

I guess one very real potential for confusion here is the big/little
stuff that ARM are pushing for next generation SoCs where a Linux image
does actually run on muliple asymmetric cores.

> Feel free to offer a different name, though really 'amp' here only
> describes the general model and motivation and is rarely used
> throughout the code; we mostly either use 'remoteproc' or 'rpmsg',
> which respectively refer to the two frameworks that are being added
> (the former responsible for controlling the state of the remote
> processors, and the latter for communicating with them).

How about using remoteproc then?
--
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/