[PATCH v4 1/3] cpufreq: mediatek: Add support of cpufreq to MT2701/MT7623 SoC

[Matthias Brugger]

Hi Eddie,

On 07/11/2017 04:49 AM, Eddie Huang wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> On Mon, 2017-07-10 at 22:23 +0800, sean.wang at mediatek.com wrote:
>> From: Sean Wang <sean.wang at mediatek.com>
>>
>> MT2701/MT7623 is a 32-bit ARMv7 based quad-core (4 * Cortex-A7) with
>> single cluster and this hardware is also compatible with the existing
>> driver through enabling CPU frequency feature with operating-points-v2
>> bindings. Also, this driver actually supports all MediaTek SoCs, the
>> Kconfig menu entry and file name itself should be updated with more
>> generic name to drop "MT8173"
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang at mediatek.com>
>> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at linaro.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare at suse.de>
>> ---
>>   drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm                              | 7 +++----
>>   drivers/cpufreq/Makefile                                 | 2 +-
>>   drivers/cpufreq/{mt8173-cpufreq.c => mediatek-cpufreq.c} | 2 ++
>>   3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>   rename drivers/cpufreq/{mt8173-cpufreq.c => mediatek-cpufreq.c} (99%)
>>
> 
> As Viresh mentioned, there are already many drivers use "mtk" as
> filename prefix or postfix.To align with those files, I suggest use
> mtk-cpufreq.c.I think there are not too many values to change all "mtk-"
> to "mediatek-", but it is worth to have the same naming rule for
> mediatek upstream driver.
> 

In the last submission Jean proposed to change all file names from 
mtk-*.[ch] to mediatek-*.[ch] as this will cause less confusion.

Viresh are you OK with that approach or do you prefer that we stay with 
mtk prefix? I think it makes sense to have a unique prefix and resolve 
the situation we now have with source files and Kconfig options.
But TBH I have no strong feeling for any of the two prefixes.

Regards,
Matthias