> Ok, we can agree that there will not be a perfect naming. Would it be a
> possibility to rename the existing TJA11xx driver to TJA1100-1-2 or is that
> unwanted?
It is generally a bad idea. It makes back porting fixing harder if the
file changes name.
> If nxp-c45.c is to generic (I take from your comments that' your
> conclusion), we could at least lean towards nxp-c45-bt1.c? Unfortunately,
> the product naming schemes are not sufficiently methodical to have a a good
> driver name based on product names.
And what does bt1 stand for?
How about nxp-c45-tja11xx.c. It is not ideal, but it does at least
give an indication of what devices it does cover, even if there is a
big overlap with nxp-tja11xx.c, in terms of pattern matching. And if
you do decide to have a major change of registers, your can call the
device tja1201 and have a new driver nxp-c45-tja12xx.
Andrew
