lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir
    From
    On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
    >
    > On Sep 12, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
    >>>>> Use the Qualcomm vendor prefix (qcom) as the directory name for
    >>>>> Qualcomm MSM devicetrees going forward.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>
    >>>>
    >>>> Let's not move just one platform like this. If we are to do this, we
    >>>> should move everything, and that will be really painful and needs to
    >>>> be done in a controlled manner, probably scripted and right before a
    >>>> -rc1 or such.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Than I suggest we deal with it when we pull the device trees out of the kernel tree.
    >>>
    >>> As such, I'd tell Rohit to go forward with the file being named apq8074-dragonboard.dtb for the time being.
    >>
    >> My original request to please use a common prefix for your product
    >> families stands. Please prefix with msm-*, or if you have to, qcom-*
    >> instead, since you guys can't seem to make your mind up on standard
    >> prefixes (msm, apq, etc).
    >
    > This is silly, I dont see the reason to go with qcom-apq<SOC>-<BOARD>.dts and than in the future drop qcom- when we mostly likely shift to a dir structure.
    >
    > As engineers we are all too aware of the lack of sanity in marketing names, but its what we have so we have to live with it.

    And we all have a choice whether we let the marketing people's
    insanity spread into our engineering projects, or if we keep it as
    sane as possible in spite of them.

    I wouldn't have an objection here if there was some sort of rationale
    between what "apq" and "msm" means. But it seems like qualcomm rolls a
    dice and decides if a platform will have one name or the other.
    Dragonboard dmesg says msm<foo>. DTS file for the same board says apq.
    DTSI file says one thing, overridden by the dts to something else.
    Total chaos.

    I would be fine with adding two instead of one (after all, platforms
    like TI has this for AM* vs OMAP*, etc), but there _has_ to be some
    sort of consistency or you might just as well assign a random string
    as name.

    So, if you can't come up with a reasonable, rational and consistent
    naming scheme (which, apparantly, you can't since your marketing guys
    are in control of this and they don't get it right), then at least
    prefix with a common string for the platform. That's all I'm asking.


    -Olof


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-09-13 06:21    [W:4.800 / U:0.120 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site