On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 05:43:47PM +0900, Jassi Brar wrote: >> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > From: Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Adds support for the Samsung PATA controller. This driver is based on the >> > Libata subsystem and references the earlier patches sent for IDE subsystem. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > drivers/ata/Kconfig | 9 + >> > drivers/ata/Makefile | 1 + >> > drivers/ata/pata_samsung.c | 591 >> >> Fasten your seat belts before reading further.... >> >> Rather than generic 'samsung', I would suggest the driver named >> after the SoC, that is supported first(chronologically) in mainline kernel. >> All newer SoCs should be simply taken to contain the controller of that SoC. >> Otherwise, the same naming problem comes back to haunt us should >> Samsung decides to use a different IP in future SoCs. What would we >> call that driver? pata_samsung_v2.c ? > > I'm not so bothered, but it could be pata_samsung_cfcon or anything, > a new block could be called pata_samsung_v2 or fred well, then pata_samsung.c is better for we know chances of this IP change in future SoCs are quite slim. And even if it does change we shall call it pata_samsung_really_final_this_time.c ;) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
