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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 7 Jan 2019 20:49:32 -0800
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
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 1/7/19 11:24 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 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

After finding the rest of the thread, and thinking further, I don't think
the easiest change is the correct change.  Ease of search is much more
than just grep of the kernel source, it is also web search engines.  I
think that the extra effort of "devicetree" is worth while in the long
run.  But I don't see a need to do an immediate global change - it can
happen either slowly over time or quickly as people choose to submit
patches.

-Frank