Re: [PATCH 00/36] AArch64 Linux kernel port

[Måns Rullgård]

Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 08:10:23AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Saturday 07 July 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> > > > ARM introduced AArch64 as part of the ARMv8 architecture
>> > > 
>> > > With the risk of bikeshedding here, but I find the name awkward. How
>> > > about just naming the arch port arm64 instead? It's considerably more
>> > > descriptive in the context of the kernel.  For reference, we didn't
>> > > name ppc64, nor powerpc, after what the IBM/power.org marketing people
>> > > were currently calling the architecture at the time either.
>> > 
>> > I agree the name sucks, [...]
>> 
>> So why not change it now, when it only bothers a few dozen 
>> people and it is only present in 36 patches? Why go full steam 
>> ahead to annoy thousands of people with it and why spread the 
>> naming madness to thousands of commits?
>
> Changing the arch/ dir name is easy at this point. My preference is for
> consistency with the official name (that cannot be changed) and the gcc
> triplet. I also don't think it annoys thousands of people, most don't
> really care. The few reactions I've seen is pretty much because people
> were expecting arm64 and it came as something else.

FWIW, I'd prefer naming the directory either arm64 or armv8 for a few
reasons:

- Those are the names people actually use to refer to the architecture
- They are more descriptive.
- I think the official name is rather silly.

Note, these are my personal opinions.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mans@xxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/