[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201006172650.GO1874917@unreal>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 20:26:50 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>
Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
"parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
"tiwai@...e.de" <tiwai@...e.de>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com"
<ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com>,
"fred.oh@...ux.intel.com" <fred.oh@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"shiraz.saleem@...el.com" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kiran.patil@...el.com" <kiran.patil@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] Add ancillary bus support
On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 05:09:09PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
>
> > From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 10:33 PM
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 10:18:07AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > > Thanks for the review Leon.
> > >
> > > > > Add support for the Ancillary Bus, ancillary_device and ancillary_driver.
> > > > > It enables drivers to create an ancillary_device and bind an
> > > > > ancillary_driver to it.
> > > >
> > > > I was under impression that this name is going to be changed.
> > >
> > > It's part of the opens stated in the cover letter.
> >
> > ok, so what are the variants?
> > system bus (sysbus), sbsystem bus (subbus), crossbus ?
> Since the intended use of this bus is to
> (a) create sub devices that represent 'functional separation' and
> (b) second use case for subfunctions from a pci device,
>
> I proposed below names in v1 of this patchset.
>
> (a) subdev_bus
It sounds good, just can we avoid "_" in the name and call it subdev?
> (b) subfunction_bus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists