Return-path: Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:57929 "EHLO mail-qw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751465Ab1DOTwC convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:52:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1302896541.30441.33.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua> 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> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:52:01 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Could I (ab)use bus (struct bus_type) for virtual Broadcom bus? From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= To: George Kashperko Cc: Hauke Mehrtens , Russell King , Arnd Bergmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Arend van Spriel , Jonas Gorski , b43-dev@lists.infradead.org, Greg KH , Andy Botting , Larry Finger Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: W dniu 15 kwietnia 2011 21:42 użytkownik George Kashperko napisał: > So, we could start with introducing virtual "ocp" bus (which could be of > some use for other vendors utilising ocp model) with additional > library/module for broadcom-specific extensions (accounting for > buscommon/buscore/etc.). I think we over-complicate that. > 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? -- Rafał