[PATCH v10 05/18] OMAP2, 3 DSS2 Change driver name to omap_display

[Cousson, Benoit]

Hi Tomi,

On 2/28/2011 8:19 AM, Valkeinen, Tomi wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 01:09 -0600, Taneja, Archit wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Monday 28 February 2011 12:23 PM, Valkeinen, Tomi wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 03:27 -0600, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 11:51 +0530, ext Sumit Semwal wrote:
>>>>> From: Senthilvadivu Guruswamy<svadivu at ti.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Change the driver name from omapdss to omap_display as the driver takes care of
>>>>> the display devices ie number of panels, type of panels available in the
>>>>> platform.  Change the device name in the board files and 2420,2430,3xxx clock
>>>>> files from omapdss to omap_display to match the driver name.
>>>>
>>>> I just realized that changing the driver name will break all scripts and
>>>> applications using omapdss sysfs files.
>>>>
>>>> How does this sound:
>>>>
>>>> Let's leave the omapdss device name as it is. It represents a "super"
>>>> device, containing the dss sysfs files and upper level dss management.

This is the case for all the drivers migrated to omap_device anyway due 
to the change in the top level hierarchy. Everything is below 
platform/omap now.
That's why we are using that opportunity to clean and provide a 
consistent naming for all devices.

>>>> Name the HW module platform drivers as: omapdss_dss, omapdss_venc,
>>>> omapdss_dispc, etc. This would indicate them to be clearly parts of DSS,
>>>> and would also prevent any possible name conflict if there would happen
>>>> to be a, say, "dsi" block in some other HW component.

Cannot you use a device hierarchy then to do that?
  omap_dss/core
  omap_dss/dsi
  omap_dss/venc

This is moreover the way the HW is done.

>>> Any comments on this?
>>
>> I also think we need to stick to the older name, "omapdss_dss" sounds a
>> bit confusing, and I think one of the previous versions had something
>> like "dss_dss" in it and it wasn't approved. Does something like
>> "omapdss_core" or "omapdss_dss_core" make sense, or is it more misleading?
>
> It is confusing, but so is the hardware naming =). There is a DSS module
> inside the omap display subsystem. That's why I would like to name it
> "dss", not "core", so it's clear it refers to this DSS module.
>
> "dss_dss" looks a bit silly, but I think "omapdss_dss" is slightly
> better in the sense that it doesn't repeat the same "dss", and there is
> an "omapdss" device, which acts like "manager" for these module devices.
> But yes, I wouldn't call it perfect either.
>
> "omapdss_dss_core" is one option. But then again, TRM doesn't speak of
> "core".

We should not maintain silly names just because they are in the TRM, we 
should just fix the TRM. This is exactly what we are going to do for 
most HW names we introduced in OMAP4.

So if we all agree that this name will avoid confusion and is much 
better than the current one, we can change it right now with a comment 
to explain the change and give the pointer to the current TRM naming.

Regards,
Benoit