On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 17:58 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 17:29 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > * Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 12:43 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > In the TRM it's called Power Management Unit, though once or > > > > twice > > > > in some > > > > documents as Power Management Controller. I actually woudn't > > > > like to > > > > use PMC > > > > abbreviation to not be confused with pmc_atom.c and many other > > > > variation of > > > > existing PMC drivers of other Intel platforms. > > > > > > > > PM* as a prefix might be too short to conflict with Power > > > > Management > > > > framework > > > > in the kernel. P-Unit (punit*) is existing part in SoC which > > > > will > > > > have its own > > > > driver in the future, so, can't use it either. > > > > > > > > pwr*, pwrmu*, scpmu* (as of South Complex Power Management Unit) > > > > — > > > > one of them? > > > > > > 'pwr' certainly sounds good to me! PWMU perhaps? > > > > Wouldn't be a bit confusing with pwm? I would stay at 'pwr'. > > Yeah, indeed - so pwr it is?
Yes. Will rename in this way, re-test and re-send. -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> Intel Finland Oy
