[PATCH v3] tty: serial: add Freescale lpuart driver support
R64188 at freescale.com
Mon May 27 05:12:25 EDT 2013
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Guo [mailto:shawn.guo at linaro.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 1:58 PM
> To: Jin Zhengxiong-R64188
> Cc: grant.likely at linaro.org; Lu Jingchang-B35083; linux-
> serial at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> gregkh at linuxfoundation.org; s.hauer at pengutronix.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tty: serial: add Freescale lpuart driver support
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 01:27:04AM +0000, Jin Zhengxiong-R64188 wrote:
> > By the way, we'll change the SoC name from mvf600 to vf610 to align the
> description in the document.
> Such product renaming in documents happen on IMX as well, but we do not
> bother to churn the source tree (file, function renaming) to catch up
> with it, as long as we know what it is.
> For this mvf600 to vf610 renaming, if you want to catch up with it, you
> will need to rename a bunch of files functions, compatibles in
> Jingchang's series, and it's probably fine even though it's not really
> necessary since they haven't been merged. But for those which have been
> merged, like fec compatible string, doing this will probably piss off
> maintainers. So I would suggest that we stick to name mvf600 in the
> source tree, and just be aware of it's the equivalent of vf610.
[Jason Jin-R64188] I think we need to align with the document as it's posted at Freescale website, otherwise, the inconsistency will confuse the customer.
please refer to:
As the development work is ahead of the formal name posted outside, we continued to use the name for upstreaming patches. Sorry for taking into the confusion. For those patches aren't merged, please help to review them based on the new SoC name.
For the merged FEC patch, we'd like to explain it to the maintainer, Or can we just keep the FEC compatible string as before("fsl, mvf600-fec")? And be aware of it's the equivalent of "fsl,vf610-fec"?
More information about the linux-arm-kernel