On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-li...@fluff.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 05:43:47PM +0900, Jassi Brar wrote:
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene....@samsung.com> wrote:
>> > From: Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesa...@samsung.com>
>> >
>> > Adds support for the Samsung PATA controller. This driver is based on the
>> > Libata subsystem and references the earlier patches sent for IDE subsystem.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesa...@samsung.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene....@samsung.com>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/ata/Kconfig | 9 +
>> > drivers/ata/Makefile | 1 +
>> > drivers/ata/pata_samsung.c | 591
>>
>> Fasten your seat belts before reading further....
>>
>> Rather than generic 'samsung', I would suggest the driver named
>> after the SoC, that is supported first(chronologically) in mainline kernel.
>> All newer SoCs should be simply taken to contain the controller of that SoC.
>> Otherwise, the same naming problem comes back to haunt us should
>> Samsung decides to use a different IP in future SoCs. What would we
>> call that driver? pata_samsung_v2.c ?
>
> I'm not so bothered, but it could be pata_samsung_cfcon or anything,
> a new block could be called pata_samsung_v2 or fred
well, then pata_samsung.c is better for we know chances of this IP change in
future SoCs are quite slim.
And even if it does change we shall call it
pata_samsung_really_final_this_time.c ;)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
