On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 8 August 2012 20:16, Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 21:00:59 +0000
>>> Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Please use more descriptive names instead of acronyms, for example
>>>> SubChStatus.
>>>
>>> I'd rather leave these at the well-known scsw, pmcw, etc. names. These
>>> have been around for decades, and somebody familiar with channel I/O
>>> will instantly know what a struct scsw is, but will need to look hard
>>> at the code to figure out the meaning of SubChStatus.
>>
>> If they are well-known and have been around for so long time, are
>> there any suitable header files (with compatible licenses) where they
>> are defined which could be reused?
>>
>> Otherwise, please follow CODING_STYLE.
>
> I think we should follow CODING_STYLE for capitalisation issues
> but generally if the device's documentation has standard abbreviations
> for register names, structures, etc, etc we should use them. Often
> this code has to be maintained later by somebody else who might not
> be familiar with the general operation of the hardware and who is trying
> to match up the code with whatever the data sheet says. Following the
> naming used in the h/w docs makes that job easier.
Yes. typedef struct SCSW {} SCSW; should be OK too.
>
> (for instance I took the opportunity of making a bunch of structure
> member names in target-arm line up with the ARM ARM names
> as part of the refactoring that went on a while back.)
>
> -- PMM
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
