Hi, On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 09:28:49AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 08:57:41AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > The naming needs to be decided. usb_transceiver is indeed a long name, > > > but I'm not completely happy with usb_xceiv name. I would prefer > > > usb_phy. > > > > I'm fine with both usb_transceiver and usb_phy, but please no usb_xceiv > > as it is hard to remember. What was it again, usb_xceiv, usb_xcv or even > > usb_xceiver? > > Felipe, do you have any comments to this? no strong feelings... I just don't like to type long names :-p Maybe usb_phy is ok. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
