On 11/5/2009 1:16 PM, jassi brar wrote: > On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 11/5/2009 10:34 AM, Jassi Brar wrote: >>> The s3c24xx_pcm prefix for the soc_platform is inappropriate when >>> some Samsung SoCs have PCM controllers which will eventually have >>> drivers and hence namespace ambiguities. >>> >>> To resolve naming ambiguities in future the following have been >>> renamed in order >>> 1) s3c24xx_pcm_dma_params -> s3c_audio_dma_params >>> 2) s3c24xx_pcm_preallocate_dma_buffer -> s3c_preallocate_dma_buffer >>> 3) s3c24xx_pcm_dmamask -> s3c_dmamask >>> 4) s3c24xx_pcm_XXX -> s3c_dma_XXX >>> >> I think that it should have a consistent prefix: s3c_audio_dma_ or >> other prefix. > Ideally, Yes. > but if we try so, we have the following > 1) s3c24xx_pcm_dma_params -> s3c_dma_dma_params > 2) s3c24xx_pcm_preallocate_dma_buffer -> s3c_dma_preallocate_dma_buffer > 3) s3c24xx_pcm_dmamask -> s3c_dma_dmamask > > none of which seem very nice. > You can modify the names for the consistent prefix. If you use s3c_dma_ prefix, for example, s3c24xx_pcm_dma_params can be to s3c_dma_params. >> BTW, should we keep up s3c prefix? If we will change the prefix now, it >> is a chance alterable from s3c prefix to other prefix because there is a >> variety of samsung SoCs unused s3c prefix. > These patches is not about changing naming conventions. Only changes, necessary > to have a clean and consistent namespace after integrating PCM driver, have > been made. Agree, but you already are changing the prefix from s3c24xx to s3c. > About changing the s3c prefix is a valid discussion, though. > _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
