On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 18:18, Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 1:01 PM Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 10:21, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > On 6/11/19 10:15 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote: >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > On Mon, 2019-06-10 at 13:14 +0000, Matt Redfearn wrote: >> > >> >> > >> On 10/06/2019 14:03, Anders Roxell wrote: >> > >>> On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 12:13, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On 6/6/19 11:47 AM, Anders Roxell wrote: >> > >>>>> When building with CONFIG_VIDEO_CODA and CONFIG_CODA_FS enabled as >> > >>>>> loadable modules, we see the following warning: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> warning: same module names found: >> > >>>>> fs/coda/coda.ko >> > >>>>> drivers/media/platform/coda/coda.ko >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> Rework so media coda matches the config fragment. Leaving CODA_FS as is >> > >>>>> since thats a well known module. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > >>>>> --- >> > >>>>> drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile | 4 ++-- >> > >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile b/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile >> > >>>>> index 54e9a73a92ab..588e6bf7c190 100644 >> > >>>>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile >> > >>>>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile >> > >>>>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ >> > >>>>> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> -coda-objs := coda-common.o coda-bit.o coda-gdi.o coda-h264.o coda-mpeg2.o coda-mpeg4.o coda-jpeg.o >> > >>>>> +video-coda-objs := coda-common.o coda-bit.o coda-gdi.o coda-h264.o coda-mpeg2.o coda-mpeg4.o coda-jpeg.o >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> -obj-$(CONFIG_VIDEO_CODA) += coda.o >> > >>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_VIDEO_CODA) += video-coda.o >> > >>>> >> > >>>> How about imx-coda? video-coda suggests it is part of the video subsystem, >> > >>>> which it isn't. >> > >>> >> > >>> I'll resend a v2 shortly with imx-coda instead. >> > > >> > > I'd be in favor of calling it "coda-vpu" instead. >> > >> > Fine by me! >> > >> > > >> > >> What about other vendor SoCs implementing the Coda IP block which are >> > >> not an imx? I'd prefer a more generic name - maybe media-coda. >> > > >> > > Right, this driver can be used on other SoCs [1]. >> > >> > Good point. >> >> OK, so I'll change it to 'media-coda'. >> >> >> > > As suggested by Philipp, coda-vpu seems the most accurate name. urgh, that correct. Thanks, Anders > > Thanks, > Ezequiel > > > >> Cheers, >> Anders >> >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Hans >> > >> > > >> > > [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg146498.html >> > > >> > > regards >> > > Philipp >> > > >> >
