linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] PCI: brcmstb: Change field name from 'type' to 'model'

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: <20240726112907.GD2628@thinkpad>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 16:59:07 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To: Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@...adcom.com>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
	Cyril Brulebois <kibi@...ian.org>,
	Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@...e.de>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, jim2101024@...il.com,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" <linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] PCI: brcmstb: Change field name from 'type' to
 'model'

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 04:38:12PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 12:58 AM Manivannan Sadhasivam
> <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 05:31:26PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> > > The 'type' field used in the driver to discern SoC differences is confusing
> > > so change it to the more apt 'model'.  We considered using 'family' but
> > > this conflicts with Broadcom's conception of a family; for example, 7216a0
> > > and 7216b0 chips are both considered separate families as each has multiple
> > > derivative product chips based on the original design.
> > >
> >
> > TBH, 'model' is also confusing :) Why can't you just use 'soc' as you are
> > referrring to the SoC name.
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Well, the "model" we assign is not necessarily the same as the SoC.
> If a new SoC has the same characteristics as a previous "model", we
> will not create a new model but rather use the existing one.   For example,
> the bcm7216_cfg structure, which is for the 7216 SoC uses the model "BCM7278".
> 
> I agree that this is not crystal clear but using SoC could be
> considered misleading.
> 

Ok, thanks for clarifying. Still I think you can use 'soc' prefix.

For naming, how about 'soc_base'? This specifies the SoC baseline used by *this*
Soc.

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்