Yamada-san, Thank you for the detailed write up. I hope we find a good solution, too. I've got a few questions first: > I know this is a big churn, but I'd like > to propose renaming like follows in a long run: > > tmio_mmc_core.c -> mnsd.c Core code of this IP > tmio_mmc.c -> mnsd-tmio.c For MMC integrated in TMIO MFD > renesas_sdhi_core.c -> mnsd-renesas-core.c For Renesas SoCs > (or, mnsd-sdhi-core.c or whatever. please choose any favorite name) > mnsd-uniphier.c For Socionext UniPhier SoCS Do you want to just change the filenames or the function names as well? > I see more strangeness. Those mmc drivers must include <linux/mfd/tmio.h>, > but TMIO is unrelated to Renesas, Socionext. > We need to fix the interface. What kind of fix do you have in mind? Changing filenames or change everything which has TMIO or tmio in the name? > If I can get consensus, I am very happy to > contribute for better organizing this IP variants. > > CCing Marek Vasut, a contractor working for Renesas. > He and I are also working on SD card driver in U-Boot. > I want to introduce correct and systematic naming scheme > for a long-run maintainability and applicable to other projects > since Linux has a big influence in OSS. Can you explain a bit more why the long-run maintainability gets improved? I don't really see that yet and will try to explain below. Disclaimer: I am contracted by Renesas but the views I am going to share come from my personal point of view as the maintainer of this driver. Preface: For me, names are just names. We have a few examples where the "historical" names are kept because they just happened to be first. The AT24 driver supports way more than only Atmel chips, and all the STMPE have kept their names, although the SoC is called MXS these days. Which also proves that names are just names, IP cores and companies are easily renamed. If we can rename things easily to match reality, I am not against it. In this case, I wonder, though, if the rename is really easy? If you just change the filenames, then we got a strange mix, because the function names are still using tmio_*. If you change those function names, too, then the resulting change is very intrusive. It could introduce errors, looking up git history becomes a tad more tedious, and users may get confused what is what. Seeing all this, I don't think such a change would be helpful for the long-run maintainability. I'd be much happier with a paragraph at the beginning of the "TMIO" core file (or maybe all "TMIO" files, I don't care much) explaining the situation like you did with your mail. But keeping the code largely as-is. I am open for discussion, though. Again, this is my personal view. We will discuss things internally, too, to see if there is also an "official" statement from Renesas. Thanks, Wolfram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
