[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd80aad674ee48faaaedc8698c9b23e2@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 13:09:55 +0000
From: "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
To: "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>,
Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
"Ertman, David M" <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>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Patil, Kiran" <kiran.patil@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/6] Add ancillary bus support
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] Add ancillary bus support
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 12:21 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 05:41:00PM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote:
> > > > 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?
> > > >
> > >
> > > What is wrong with naming the bus 'ancillary bus'? I feel it's a fitting name.
> > > An ancillary software bus for ancillary devices carved off a parent device
> registered on a primary bus.
> >
> > Greg summarized it very well, every internal conversation about this
> > patch with my colleagues (non-english speakers) starts with the question:
> > "What does ancillary mean?"
> > https://lore.kernel.org/alsa-devel/20201001071403.GC31191@kroah.com/
> >
> > "For non-native english speakers this is going to be rough, given that
> > I as a native english speaker had to go look up the word in a
> > dictionary to fully understand what you are trying to do with that
> > name."
>
> I suggested "auxiliary" in another splintered thread on this question.
> In terms of what the kernel is already using:
>
> $ git grep auxiliary | wc -l
> 507
> $ git grep ancillary | wc -l
> 153
>
> Empirically, "auxiliary" is more common and closely matches the intended function
> of these devices relative to their parent device.
auxiliary bus is a befitting name as well.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists