Hi Laurent.
> >
> > Please read the cover letter, it explains why it's done this way. The
> > whole point of this patchset is to merge DSI and DBI frameworks in a
> > way that can be maintained.
>
> I think this proves the point that the proposed naming is confusing. At
> least a rename would be required.
Do you have any inputs on the amount of rename we are looking into.
Is this a simple s/struct mipi_dsi_device/struct mipi_dxi_device/
or something more?
We should script the rename as it will tocuh a lot of files,
and without a script we would chase this. But once it is scripted
it would be trivial to perform.
I did not look at this enough, but I had an idea that we
would have do to a s/dsi/dxi/ in a lot of places.
(dxi is my best proposal at the moment for something covering both dsi
and dbi).
PS. I am travelling for a few days, so do not expect quick responses.
Sam
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
