[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: New kernel/resource.c
Hi Linus.

>> You are right. Thanks for your patience. I cast my vote for
>> "pcbus" instead of "pci". Love the resource concept.

> "pcbus" would certainly fit my requirement for being specific
> enough, and it's probably non-specific enough that others
> wouldn't jump up and down too much.

> However, at the same time it doesn't actually "say" much to me
> either. "ioport_resource" is fairly descriptive: the thing it
> guards are actually commonly called "IO ports". Compared to that
> "pcbus_io_resource" is too bland, and while it's logical it
> doesn't tell people who are used to the terminology exactly
> what's up.

> So I've already set my heart on "ioport". I don't know about
> "iomem", though: nobody calls memory-mapped accesses "IO memory"
> accesses. "PCI memory" actually describes at least to me exactly
> what it's all about, which is why I liked "pci_mem_resource".
> "pcbus_mem" lacks that mental image for me.

> Oh, well. It's just a name. Or two, actually.

Why not just use "io_resource" and "mem_resource" respectively?

Best wishes from Riley.

| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.078 / U:1.012 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site