Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1621496 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-11 19:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-04-12 08:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 03/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: Replace cpufreq_device with cpufreq_dev Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 03/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: Replace cpufreq_device with cpufreq_dev Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2017-04-12 08:20 +0200
| From | Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 19:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 03/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: Replace cpufreq_device with cpufreq_dev |
| Message-ID | <tv7VL-1CC-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:59:38AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Objects of "struct cpufreq_cooling_device" are named a bit > inconsistently. Lets use cpufreq_dev everywhere. > Naming is always a matter of taste.. but I frankly cannot see how this patch improves anything here. cpufreq_dev is still misleading. Here other options: cpufreq_cooling_dev: not misleading but, may a bit too long.. cpufreq_cdev: better, but still, not a char dev > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 08:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvjNf-10A-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1621496 |
On 11-04-17, 10:33, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:59:38AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Objects of "struct cpufreq_cooling_device" are named a bit > > inconsistently. Lets use cpufreq_dev everywhere. > > > > Naming is always a matter of taste.. but I frankly cannot see how this > patch improves anything here. cpufreq_dev is still misleading. I wasn't trying to get to a better name, but rather be consistent. > Here other options: > cpufreq_cooling_dev: not misleading but, may a bit too long.. > cpufreq_cdev: better, but still, not a char dev I will go for the second one. -- viresh
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web