[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YHWjU2LEXTqEYCmZ@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 15:57:39 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Christian Herber <christian.herber@....nxp.com>
Cc: "Radu-nicolae Pirea (OSS)" <radu-nicolae.pirea@....nxp.com>,
"hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: nxp-c45: add driver for tja1103
> Ok, we can agree that there will not be a perfect naming. Would it be a
> possibility to rename the existing TJA11xx driver to TJA1100-1-2 or is that
> unwanted?
It is generally a bad idea. It makes back porting fixing harder if the
file changes name.
> If nxp-c45.c is to generic (I take from your comments that' your
> conclusion), we could at least lean towards nxp-c45-bt1.c? Unfortunately,
> the product naming schemes are not sufficiently methodical to have a a good
> driver name based on product names.
And what does bt1 stand for?
How about nxp-c45-tja11xx.c. It is not ideal, but it does at least
give an indication of what devices it does cover, even if there is a
big overlap with nxp-tja11xx.c, in terms of pattern matching. And if
you do decide to have a major change of registers, your can call the
device tja1201 and have a new driver nxp-c45-tja12xx.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists