Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752377Ab0LOQkk (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:40:40 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:56412 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750715Ab0LOQkh (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:40:37 -0500 From: Arnd Bergmann To: David Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] msm: io: I/O register definitions for MSM8960 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:40:24 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31-22-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Stepan Moskovchenko , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1292384961-8851-1-git-send-email-stepanm@codeaurora.org> <201012151631.11574.arnd@arndb.de> <20101215153540.GA15817@huya.qualcomm.com> In-Reply-To: <20101215153540.GA15817@huya.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201012151740.24933.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:JlYSl5DYS9MYVobwv3FaUsU4FG5hdNcuzUjCA4FMKJ1 0xdxbq9ehOPLR5bFJX2j7LqF0PYIhjWhNgLcjqztUzU8XhsCRO l+8ni40vyOKgJewDPLXKt+NIjFVKHh/ct9plv0WD1zI8c5Dekg sUXs4Jdg1zDsVtmFKc73DuzKLN4HECVnqel8OTkrTjyHMhuwk4 ABQtIlrHnal20650ParjA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1237 Lines: 28 On Wednesday 15 December 2010, David Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 04:31:11PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 15 December 2010, Stepan Moskovchenko wrote: > > > In this particular case, it's rather confusing, because one would assume > > that MSM8960 is a subset of MSM8X60! > > Unfortunately, this is not the case, and I'm not sure what better name > to use for MSM8X60. The MSM8X60 name covers MSM8260 and MSM8660, but > MSM8960 is quite a bit different. Any ideas for better names? No, you probably lose there, unless you can fall back to code names instead of product numbers. My point was really that they should not be exclusive, even if they are rather different. If the code is structured in a more modular way, you can turn all MSM/QSD options from the "Qualcomm MSM SoC Type" choice into separate "bool" config options. You probably don't want to do that now for all the existing ones, but I would suggest you try not add more to the pile ;-). Arnd -- 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/