Re: [PATCH v1 01/12] gna: add driver module
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Fri Feb 26 2021 - 08:04:55 EST
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 01:59:14PM +0100, Maciej Kwapulinski wrote:
>
>
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 05:05:14PM +0100, Maciej Kwapulinski wrote:
>
....
>
>> --- /dev/null
>
>> +++ b/drivers/misc/gna/gna_driver.h
>
>> @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
>
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
>
>> +/* Copyright(c) 2017-2021 Intel Corporation */
>
>> +
>
>> +#ifndef __GNA_DRIVER_H__
>
>> +#define __GNA_DRIVER_H__
>
>> +
>
>> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
>
>> +#include <linux/mutex.h>
>
>> +#include <linux/types.h>
>
>> +
>
>> +#define GNA_DRV_NAME "gna"
>
>
>
> Way too generic, no one knows what "gna" is.
>
>
>
>
"intel gna" is much more verbose in search engines.
>
As we do not (plan to) have more "gna" drivers, is the following ok?:
>
>
intel-gna
>
>
the change would imply the following:
>
>
prompt$ lspci -s 00:00.3 -vvvv
>
00:00.3 System peripheral: Intel Corporation Device 3190 (rev 03)
>
Subsystem: Intel Corporation Device 2072
>
....
>
Kernel driver in use: intel-gna
>
Kernel modules: gna
>
>
is it ok?
Why not intel-gna as the kernel module as well?
>
also, how about the interface to library (it's part of one of next patches)?:
>
prompt$ file /dev/gna0
>
/dev/gna0: character special (235/0)
>
>
can "gna" stay intact here?
Again, I have no idea what "gna" is, so you might want to pick something
more descriptive?
>
I'm pointing this out, because gna exists on the market for a while and
>
changing the above may have some impact we'd like to avoid.
If it exists but Linux does not support it, how would anyone know about
it? :)
Please use real terms where possible.
thanks,
greg k-h