Dear sir,

2009/8/18 Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref]:

Hi Wan,

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 04:44:03PM +0800, Wan ZongShun wrote:

quoted

Dear Dmitry,

Sir, Due to only w90p910 was renamed, other CPUs of the series
originally was named after NUC9xx,
the ts and keypad was public use by w90p910 ,nuc950 and nuc920,

OK, I see.

 so, if

quoted

the 'w90p910-ts' and 'w90p910-keypad' could not be renamed ,I have to
make the platform device names of nuc920 and nuc960 named after
'w90p910-ts' and 'w90p910-keypad' too, Hmm, I think it is so confused.

May I suggest calling the driver/devices nuc9xx-ts and nuc9xx-ts?

Sir, I prefer these nuc9xx more than nuc900 too for representing the
series SoCs,
but, it just be my embarrassing, I have argued this Naming issue with Nuvoton,
and they did not agree me and prefer to use nuc900.

I know well it should not have company politics in Linux community,
but I have to
consider their point of view sometimes.

Then you should have some wiggle room. Also I think you should push out the
patches changing driver names together with your platform code (and not
through subsystem trees), otheriwse there will be a period when drivers
stop binding to your devices. Just make sure you get Acks from the
maintainers and you should be set.

Sir, good idea, Can the patch be merged into my platform patch and
submit Russell's list?
I had hoped that this patches and platform patches could appear at the
same time in 2.6.32-rc1,
so ,regarding miss binding ,there 's no likelihood of it happening.
 It should be so？

And please adjust the Kconfig entries to mention the other chipsets as
well.

Ok. thanks!

--
Dmitry

-- 
Wan z.s
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html