On 10/06/2019 14:03, Anders Roxell wrote:

On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 12:13, Hans Verkuil [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 6/6/19 11:47 AM, Anders Roxell wrote:

quoted

When building with CONFIG_VIDEO_CODA and CONFIG_CODA_FS enabled as
loadable modules, we see the following warning:

warning: same module names found:
   fs/coda/coda.ko
   drivers/media/platform/coda/coda.ko

Rework so media coda matches the config fragment. Leaving CODA_FS as is
since thats a well known module.

Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <redacted>
---
  drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile | 4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile b/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile
index 54e9a73a92ab..588e6bf7c190 100644
--- a/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/media/platform/coda/Makefile

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
  # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only

-coda-objs := coda-common.o coda-bit.o coda-gdi.o coda-h264.o coda-mpeg2.o coda-mpeg4.o coda-jpeg.o
+video-coda-objs := coda-common.o coda-bit.o coda-gdi.o coda-h264.o coda-mpeg2.o coda-mpeg4.o coda-jpeg.o

-obj-$(CONFIG_VIDEO_CODA) += coda.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_VIDEO_CODA) += video-coda.o

How about imx-coda? video-coda suggests it is part of the video subsystem,
which it isn't.

I'll resend a v2 shortly with imx-coda instead.

What about other vendor SoCs implementing the Coda IP block which are 
not an imx? I'd prefer a more generic name - maybe media-coda.

Thanks,
Matt

Cheers,
Anders

quoted

Regards,

         Hans

quoted

  obj-$(CONFIG_VIDEO_IMX_VDOA) += imx-vdoa.o