[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <54d9edd5-377e-4d9a-956f-8f2ba49d4295@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:10:07 +0800
From: "Jiaxun Yang" <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
To: "Huacai Chen" <chenhuacai@...nel.org>
Cc: "Kelvin Cheung" <keguang.zhang@...il.com>,
"Vinod Koul" <vkoul@...nel.org>, "Rob Herring" <robh@...nel.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Conor Dooley" <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v9 0/2] Add support for Loongson1 APB DMA
在2024年7月16日七月 下午5:40,Huacai Chen写道:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 3:00 PM Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 在2024年7月15日七月 下午2:39,Huacai Chen写道:
>> [...]
>> >
>> >> You said that you've accepted my suggestion, which means you recognize
>> >> 'loongson' as the better name for the drivers.
>> > No, I don't think so, this is just a compromise to keep consistency.
>>
>> Folks, can we settle on this topic?
>>
>> Is this naming really important? As long as people can read actual chip name from
>> kernel code & documents, I think both are acceptable.
>>
>> I suggest let this patch go as is. And if anyone want to unify the naming, they can
>> propose a treewide patch.
> Renaming still breaks config files.
This is trival with treewide sed :-)
Thanks
- Jiaxun
--
- Jiaxun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists