Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:42348 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751552Ab3A1Mtm (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2013 07:49:42 -0500 Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Tzo9c-0001vW-HQ for linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:49:40 +0100 Message-ID: <1359377405.8120.16.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20130128_134946_582951_56A31DED) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/37] iwlwifi: add the MVM driver From: Johannes Berg To: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:50:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1359365864-4259-1-git-send-email-johannes@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20130128_103728_069407_001EDD61) References: <1359365864-4259-1-git-send-email-johannes@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20130128_103728_069407_001EDD61) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Question for the list ... Internally, we've identified patches to this new driver as "iwlwifi (MVM):" rather than just "iwlwifi:" We can continue doing so (and would probably also tag patches with "iwlwifi" for core and "iwlwifi (DVM)" for the DVM part. Would "iwlmvm"/"iwldvm"/"iwlwifi" make more sense as that's the module names? It's harder to filter though, I guess. Thoughts? johannes