Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sun, 23 Jul 2023 12:04:50 -0400
From:   Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To:     Wireless mailing list <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        USB mailing list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        PCI mailing list <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Nomenclature for USB-connected WiFi devices
Message-ID: <8ce5288f-9ed2-4df9-a0a2-bb46941089fb@rowland.harvard.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Precedence: bulk

If you've got a WiFi device that connects to the host computer via USB, 
do you refer to it as a "wireless USB device" or as a "USB wireless 
device"?

The second would seem to be more logical, by analogy with things like a 
USB mouse or a USB thumbdrive -- we don't say "mouse USB device" or 
"thumbdrive USB device"!

Furthermore, the first ("Wireless USB") is in fact the name of a defunct 
specification for an Ultra-WideBand interface that would run the USB 
communication protocol over a wireless connection.

Nevertheless there are quite a few places in the kernel source that use 
"wireless USB" where they really mean "USB wireless".  (A few of them 
are gray cases, like "Sierra Wireless USB-to-WWAN", although here the 
word "Wireless" evidently is redundant -- maybe it is part of a brand 
name?)

Would there be any objection to a patch that does a wholesale conversion 
from "wireless USB" to "USB wireless"?

Alan Stern

PS: Similar reasoning applies to the term "wireless PCIe device", 
although here the number of offenders is smaller.