linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir

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]

Date:	Mon, 16 Sep 2013 13:46:08 -0500
From:	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
To:	Rohit Vaswani <rvaswani@...eaurora.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc:	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir


On Sep 16, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Rohit Vaswani wrote:

> On 9/12/2013 7:05 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 5:47 PM, David Brown wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:55:36PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>>> My original request to please use a common prefix for your product
>>>>> families stands. Please prefix with msm-*, or if you have to, qcom-*
>>>>> instead, since you guys can't seem to make your mind up on standard
>>>>> prefixes (msm, apq, etc).
>>>> This is silly, I dont see the reason to go with
>>>> qcom-apq<SOC>-<BOARD>.dts and than in the future drop qcom- when we
>>>> mostly likely shift to a dir structure.  As engineers we are all too
>>>> aware of the lack of sanity in marketing names, but its what we have
>>>> so we have to live with it.
>>> At least what we'd decided a year or two ago was to call _everything_
>>> with an msm* prefix.  If marketing comes up with cute prefixes for
>>> things, we would basically ignore them.  So, under that, it should be
>>> an msm8074-dragonboard.  Admittedly, it might be a little confusing
>>> with the name of the product having the apq in it, but as others have
>>> pointed out, I think there is less confusing than not having a common
>>> prefix on our MSM products.
>>> 
>>> At least so far, there are no chips where apq vs msm actually
>>> distinguishes anything.  In fact, a simple "decoder ring" would point
>>> out that the 'apq' usually corresponds with the second digit being a
>>> zero.  It doesn't help that we've added an 'mpq' prefix as well.
>>> 
>>> I don't really see how to satisfy all of this other than qcom-apq*, or
>>> just continue to use msm*.
> 
> I think going ahead with what David mentioned  for msm* works if we can be consistent or if we want to explicitly mention apq in the file name, then
> we can rename them to be qcom-msm* or qcom-apq* if people care about the differences between them.
> 
>> 
>> I think msm has run out of steam, especially as more SoCs come out of Qualcomm that aren't just targeting phones & tablets.
>> 
>> - k

I think the two options are either:

qcom-msm*, qcom-apq*, etc

or 

qcom/msm-*, qcom/apq*, etc

I'm guessing we'll end up without the dir and in the future have:

qcom/qcom-msm-*, qcom/qcom-apq-*

Olof???

- k

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
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/