svn commit: r326773 - in head/sys: conf dev/syscon

[Rodney W. Grimes]

> On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:18:36 +0000
> Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:14:04AM -0800, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> > > I think this name might confuse people looking for "syscons". Can it be
> > > renamed? Also, if it is ARM-specific, maybe it belongs in sys/arm?
> > 
> > +1 for rename, it's very confusing now.

++1 rename it or expect irrate users

> > 
> > ./danfe
> 
>  It's not confusing. The spec is clear it's named "syscon" so our
> driver must be named syscon, naming it otherwise would be confusing.
>  What's confusing is the directory name for "sc" named syscons, it's
> config options are named SC_* and the device is named sc.

The spec is wrong for dictating what any implementation must
call this, the spec does not own the implementation name space.

It is called called syscons and uses the variables and driver
names sc beacuse that is what we did back in the 90's, drivers
typically had 2 character names.

>  The only valuable remark in this thread is bde's one saying it's not
> documented etc ... and yes we do sucks in this area in the arm world.

Thank you for your dismissal of input from the community, does that
mean your gong to ignore them?

>  Anyhow, I caught a discussion between mmel@ and kevans@ on IRC saying
> that we will move the driver into extres after adding some standard
> stuff common to extres framework.

FYI why is this so bad an idea to call it syscons:
	man syscons
How do you plan to resolve that name space conflict?
AND this man page has existed since 1.0,  So 25 years of
finger memory, your just not gona do well trying to change that.


-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes at freebsd.org