On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 18:39:53 -0400 Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:22 AM, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The old interface just copies bits over and calls the newer one. > > In addition we can now pass more information. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > [...] > > > - * serial8250_register_port and serial8250_unregister_port allows for > > + * serial8250_register_8250_port and serial8250_unregister_port allows > > This seems a bit lopsided. Can we convert the unregister too, and > then just keep the old names, and avoid the doubling up on the > presence of 8250 in the name? (I confess to having not looked > at the code to seeing if there is an obvious barrier to doing this), That wouldn't be a bad idea for a follow up. I didn't pick the names - they were changed earlier so that we could have both APIs. Now the old API is gone we could at some point rename it back - but that ought to wait a while so any out of tree stuff continues to break for a bit to avoid accidents. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
