On Mon. 28 Nov. 2022 at 22:49, Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > devlink does not yet have a name suited for the bootloader and so this > > last piece of information is exposed to the userland for through a > > custom name: "bl". > > Jiri, what do you think about 'bl'? Is it too short, not well known > enough? It could easily be 'bootloader'. For the record, I name it "bl" by analogy with the firmware which is named "fw". My personal preference would have been to name the fields without any abbreviations: "firmware", "bootloader" and "hardware.revision" (for reference ethtool -i uses "firmware-version"). But I tried to put my personal taste aside and try to fit with the devlink trends to abbreviate things. Thus the name "bl". Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol
