* Premi, Sanjeev <premi@xxxxxx> [090512 08:01]: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > [mailto:linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kevin Hilman > > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 8:29 PM > > To: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: Shilimkar, Santosh > > Subject: OMAP4 naming conventions > > > > As the OMAP4 patches are coming in, there seems to be a bit of variety > > in the naming of functions/macros/variables etc. > > > > Could I propose that we just use omap4_* and OMAP4_* instead of > > OMAP44XX_* or OMAP4XXXX_* etc. > > > > I know that OMAP2 and OMAP3 have a variety of forms here too, but > > those should probably be cleaned up eventually too. > > > > With proper runtime revision detecting, IMO, we should only really > > have the OMAP4 prefix, and leave the sub revision handling to runtime > > code. > > > > Thoughts? > > Full ACK. Sounds good to me too. Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
