Return-path: Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:35559 "EHLO mail-qw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751420Ab1BPNNc convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:13:32 -0500 Received: by qwa26 with SMTP id 26so1264554qwa.19 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 05:13:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:13:32 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: [RFC] How to rename SSB_TMSLOW_*, B43_TMSLOW_*? From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= To: Michael Buesch , George Kashperko , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Cc: b43-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Except for following 3 defines: #define SSB_TMSLOW_RESET 0x00000001 /* Reset */ #define SSB_TMSLOW_REJECT_22 0x00000002 /* Reject (Backplane rev 2.2) */ #define SSB_TMSLOW_REJECT_23 0x00000004 /* Reject (Backplane rev 2.3) */ All our SSB_TMSLOW_* and B43_TMSLOW_* defines are some core control bits. As we now know, core control bits are not SSB specific or TMSLOW specific. Should we (and how) define that names in this situation? For b43 I propose (quite obvious?) B43_CORE_CTL_*. However what about SSB_TMSLOW_*? George proposed SSB_CORECTL_*, but it contains "SSB", while that bits are not SSB specific. Same bits are used on AI bus. Should we use some SSBAI_CORE_CTL_* then? Any other ideas? Some better maybe? P.S. Personally I prefer CORE_CTL over CORECTL (George). Which one should we use? -- Rafał