Return-path: Received: from foo.stuge.se ([212.181.44.140]:59835 "HELO foo.stuge.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751489Ab1DOUD1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 16:03:27 -0400 Message-ID: <20110415195642.22440.qmail@stuge.se> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:56:42 +0200 From: Peter Stuge To: =?utf-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Cc: George Kashperko , Arnd Bergmann , Hauke Mehrtens , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Russell King , Arend van Spriel , Larry Finger , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Could I (ab)use bus (struct bus_type) for virtual Broadcom bus? References: <1302781431.21145.6.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua> <4DA6E9BD.3090404@hauke-m.de> <1302786900.21965.52.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua> <1302892585.30441.12.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua> <1302896541.30441.33.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Rafał Miłecki wrote: > > On other hand just broadcom-specific bus looks like good alternative > > too but here I just fail to decide on relevant naming. > > Just bcmamba / bcmaxi? Do bcm make any other (different) busses that would warrant a more specific name, hinting somehow at the wireless cards specifically? Or is it just cool to have a short name? Me I always like short names. //Peter