On 06/24/2012 07:01 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 07:04:29PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:48:58 -0700
>> Jesse Barnes <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
>>> +static struct attribute *gt_attrs[] = {
>>> + &dev_attr_gt_energy_uJ.attr,
>>> + NULL,
>>> +};
>>
>> I think convention dictates it should be all lowercase. And while on
>> that, gt_energy_uJ is about as descriptive a name as rc6 (what jerk
>> named that anyway?). I think something like consumed_microjoules is
>> better.
>
> I admit that the uJ makes tons of sense for me - J is the official SI
> abbrev. for joules (I'm a bit unsure about u for \mu, but it seems to be
> customary). Adding consumed makes some sense I think, but otherwise it's
> imo good if we stick with the names vpg ppl have come up. So
> gt_consumed_energy_uJ anyone? I can bikeshed this name while applying ...
> -Daniel
<bikeshed>
I'd vote for gt_energy or gt_consumed_energy, which would provide
results in plain J instead of mJ or uJ. This would result in a smaller
name + power readings which are standardized.
</bikeshed>
But if we settle on uJ values, gt_consumed_energy_uJ seems to be more
self-explainable to me.
Eugeni
