Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754897AbXEARM6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 13:12:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754895AbXEARM6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 13:12:58 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.234]:28497 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754893AbXEARMs (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 13:12:48 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:date:from:x-priority:message-id:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pReL9Er0b11yaCwX1u2HYzoXLQcYO1NFtc+TWAGYRkjJ219lkRpEjtH5blMc5y9yAGWxsNUeN9exFt1Dh5r2xjFyaBpv/0XWxBklN9ibRVu5jkKzlvfW59QsJNwMx4nZbD4UW/XsXUtGrmcCfJi5MTk2Y4rKMi7g7CMe0zbwvx8= Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 20:12:44 +0300 From: Paul Sokolovsky X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <10210279863.20070501201244@gmail.com> To: Dmitry Krivoschekov CC: ian , kernel-discuss@handhelds.org, , Subject: Re: [Kernel-discuss] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/4] SoC base drivers In-Reply-To: <46376D14.9060803@gmail.com> References: <1354376306.20070501080806@gmail.com> <46374645.2030900@gmail.com> <1178034935.15769.3.camel@wirenth> <46376D14.9060803@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1397 Lines: 40 Hello Dmitry, Tuesday, May 1, 2007, 7:38:44 PM, you wrote: > ian wrote: >> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 17:53 +0400, Dmitry Krivoschekov wrote: >>> Hi Paul, >> >>> I think your referring to the term "SoC (system-on-chip)" is confusing >>> (at least for me). You rather consider companion chips than SoCs. >> >> A 'System' does not imply a CPU. A 'Computer System' would but the word >> system itself doesnt even imply electronic. >> >> > A "system" means something complete. Yes I agree it doesn't imply a CPU, > but acronym SoC traditionally imply something different than you propose. > Adding another meaning for SoC will confuse people because they will have > to distinguish if it is a processor or just a slave IC. I'm afraid we'd just have ontological argument unless tried to bring in some references. But wikipedia does agree with you, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System-on-a-chip . So, well, down with redefining SoC then. But "companion" is still too narrow and buzzwordy, so let's explore Richard Purdie suggestion (in the other mail). > Thanks, > Dmitry -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/