linux-kernel - Re: Consistent capitalization of "device tree"?

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: <20190107192458.GG933@amd>
Date:   Mon, 7 Jan 2019 20:24:58 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, corbet@....net,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Consistent capitalization of "device tree"?

On Mon 2019-01-07 11:06:27, Frank Rowand wrote:
> 
> + Frank
> 
> On 1/7/19 10:37 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Is it "Device Tree" or "device tree"?
> >     
> >  pavel@duo:/data/l/k/Documentation$ grep -r "Device Tree"  | wc -l
> >  235
> >  pavel@duo:/data/l/k/Documentation$ grep -r "device tree"  | wc -l
> >  595
> >     
> > I guess it would be nice to make it consistent. I guess "device tree"
> > is preffered?
> > 
> > Should we do something like this?
> > 								Pavel
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> >     
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/overlay-notes.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/overlay-notes.txt
> > index 725fb8d..cc5f507 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/overlay-notes.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/overlay-notes.txt
> > @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ companion document to Documentation/devicetree/dynamic-resolution-notes.txt[1]
> >  How overlays work
> >  -----------------
> >  
> > -A Device Tree's overlay purpose is to modify the kernel's live tree, and
> > +A device tree's overlay purpose is to modify the kernel's live tree, and
> >  have the modification affecting the state of the kernel in a way that
> >  is reflecting the changes.
> >  Since the kernel mainly deals with devices, any new device node that result
> > 
> 
> Not a strong opinion, but I would prefer a third option of devicetree.  That
> makes it much easier to search for.

That one is much less popular at the moment -- according to my
searches... so it would be a bigger change.

(Which I'll gladly support if I won't have to do the work... as long
as it is consistent. But I believe that "device tree" is most common
here, makes sense, and is easiest change, so...)

								Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)