On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 15:46 +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 13:48 +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > > > This patchset creates a new folder under drivers/mfd and moves there > > > > Intel > > > > related drivers. > > > > > > > > There is no functional change. The names of the kernel configuration > > > > variables > > > > are kept the same. > > > > > > Can you explain to me why you think the Intel drivers need their own > > > sub-directory please? > > > > For me it seems logical. We have many drivers related to Intel specific > > SoCs (in comparison the other mfd drivers that usually named in > > according to some standard chip codename) and they meanwhile have long > > awkward prefixes. Moreover they could share common dependencies like > > X86. > > I'm not comfortable with it and am yet to see the need. What I would > suggest is to prefix 'intel-' or similar to the related files. From > there we can see how overbearing the files are becoming and make a > decision based on that. > > If there are too many Intel related files, my first question(s) will > be a) why are there so many files b) are so many files required and c) > should they really live in MFD. > > But as yet, this patch-set is the only indication that something needs > to be done at all. >
Agreed. We will continue to use prefixes (intel_ for *.c, *.h files, and module names, and intel- for resulting *.ko files) and simultaneously think how we can arrange the files better. -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@intel.com> Intel Finland Oy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
