Hi Tomas, On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 09:17:21PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > In preparation for the MEI bus code merge, we rename the mei_device > > structure to mei_host. > > struct mei_device will be used for devices on the MEI bus in order to follow > > exisiting driver model implementations practices. > > > I'd like to NACK this name, we use 'host' for the host part of the MEI > protocol, > > You can use the mei_controller, mei_adapter, and I'm not sure what else can > come into mind. mei_controller sounds good to me.
> I prefer not to break the HW spec language. I prefer to leave it mei_device > as after all it's a device on pci bus it's not a pure host controller. > And call what is on the mei bus mei_cl_dev or mei_app_dev . From the HW > perspective it actually > talks to a client/application residing inside MEI device, it is not always a > physical device like NFC. > The bus is not physical neither. It's really items that we add to this bus, watchdog could be the next candidate for example. > Please let's find something that makes both hw and Linux happy I still believe it makes sense to use mei_device for what we add to the MEI bus. I'd be fine with mei_bus_device as well, but that would somehow look a bit awkward. Greg, Arnd, any preference ? >From the MEI core code readers perspective, this will mostly be transparent as only the technology specific parts of the MEI driver (e.g. nfc.c) will use that mei_device structure. Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
