Re: [PATCH] ARM: msm: Move msm devicetrees under a Qualcomm dir

[Olof Johansson]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sep 12, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> Use the Qualcomm vendor prefix (qcom) as the directory name for
>>>>> Qualcomm MSM devicetrees going forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> 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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/