Hi Geert,
On 5/12/23 23:30, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 2:13 PM Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5/12/23 18:20, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 2:31 PM Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Modify the CPU names (as displayed by /proc/cpuinfo) for the non-MMU
parts to be more consistent with the naming style used on the traditional
MMU parts.
The MMU parts use a simple form like: "680x0" or "68060". So modify the
names for non-MMU parts to look similar, changing like these examples:
MC68000 --> 68000
MC68328 --> 68328
MC68EZ328 --> 68ez328
COLDFIRE(m5206) --> 5206
COLDFIRE(m527x) --> 527x
Signed-off-by: Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for your patch!
Note that this is a user-visible change, and software may rely on the
current contents.
Yep, I knew this may be an issue here.
A simplistic google search doesn't seem to show anything with specific
strings like "COLDFIRE(m5208)" outside of the kernel sources. Of course
clever users may have rolled more fancy search strings with regular
expressions or the like.
So, do you think this is a case of "we must never change them"?
Or that we probably shouldn't? Or if we do change them we should
be ready to revert if it breaks something?
If soc_device_attribute and /sys/devices/soc0/soc_id can solve
your problems, it may be a good idea to play it safe and not touch
/proc/cpuinfo.
In the case if this change I was trying to solve the problem of inconsistent
naming as presented by /proc/cpuinfo. So /sys/devices/soc0/soc_id can't
directory solve that.
Regards
Greg
