Re: [RFC] usbnet: use eth%d name for known ethernet devices

From: Steve Calfee
Date: Wed Mar 23 2011 - 19:38:35 EST

On 03/23/11 16:17, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
@@ -97,6 +97,8 @@ struct driver_info {

#define FLAG_LINK_INTR 0x0800 /* updates link (carrier) status */

+#define FLAG_PTP 0x1000 /* maybe use "usb%d" names */

On Wednesday 23 March 2011 19:46:50 Greg KH wrote:
"PTP"? What does that stand for?

On Mar 23, 2011 8:36 PM, "Arnd Bergmann"<arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
point-to-point, I'll improve the comment to spell it out when
I send the fixed version.

On Wednesday 23 March 2011 20:53:13 MichaÅ Nazarewicz wrote:
I think P2P could be better.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:57:18 +0100 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Yes, good idea.

Randy Dunlap<rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
that's peer-to-peer.

OTOH, I knew that PTP was point-to-point.

It can be any of that, depending on context. For me PTP is more like
Picture Transport Protocol, whereas "2" between two letters is usually

Well, my 2 cents, picture transport protocol is so obviously different than flags for network interfaces it does not cause a mental collision. However P2P is about to become a huge wifi issue, which definitely is in the network space. So don't confuse things in the near future, don't use P2P.

Maybe a completely different, not so overused flag name would be better.

Regards, Steve

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at