On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 10:45:46 +0100 Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni at free-electrons.com> wrote: > I'm not sure it is useful to do that renaming. It is usual to have one > driver that supports multiple chips named with the forst chip it > supported. > > Also, what would happen if for example rk855 is not compatible at all > with the previous implementations? Alexandre is absolutely right. There's no need to rename a driver, it would just piss off people who are used to that name and have it in their scripts. Like when your eth0 gets renamed to some obscure enXXX <g>. -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo - CEO, Tower Technologies - Torino, Italy http://www.towertech.it
