Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190409144250.7237-1-TheSven73@gmail.com> <982e69c6-4e68-6f62-8bed-cd5a1802272b@metux.net>
 <CAGngYiUTHZFFY=H7xXHzZnN4pS0jAqWBTrcw04hjf5S-ykxC9w@mail.gmail.com> <c1831703-a476-8870-0a5f-9060bda0f669@metux.net>
In-Reply-To: <c1831703-a476-8870-0a5f-9060bda0f669@metux.net>
From:   Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:56:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGngYiXx2eKR7DnHm9sNWVC+B1F2N6uUNXqZAq4rey2yjU1RyA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/7] Add Fieldbus subsystem + support HMS Profinet card
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@metux.net>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>,
        treding@nvidia.com, David Lechner <david@lechnology.com>,
        noralf@tronnes.org, johan@kernel.org,
        Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>, michal.vokac@ysoft.com,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, john.garry@huawei.com,
        geert+renesas@glider.be, robin.murphy@arm.com,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
        sebastien.bourdelin@savoirfairelinux.com, icenowy@aosc.io,
        Stuart Yoder <stuyoder@gmail.com>,
        "J. Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, maxime.ripard@bootlin.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:49 PM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
<lkml@metux.net> wrote:
>
>
> Maybe I'm a bit beaurocratic here, but I really believe that precise
> naming is important, eg. for avoiding potential conflicts w/ different
> fieldbus classes (eg. mvb) that might come in the future.

I named the subsystem 'fieldbus_dev' because it handles fieldbus
devices, not controllers. Granted, it's in the drivers/staging/fieldbus
directory, but that's because people objected to the verbosity of
fieldbus_dev. In the C code, it's all fieldbus_dev.

>
> By the way: any special reason for doing this via device instead of
> socket (like we have w/ can) ?
>

A fieldbus_dev device communicates with its controller through a section
of shared memory (process memory). It just felt more logical to model
this as a device which acts like a file. When you read/write the file,
you read/write the process memory underneath.

Sven