Re: [PATCH 1/2] tools/memory-model: clarify the origin/scope of the tool name

[Will Deacon]

On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 01:03:29PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Ingo pointed out that:
> 
>   "The "memory model" name is overly generic, ambiguous and somewhat
>    misleading, as we usually mean the virtual memory layout/model
>    when we say "memory model". GCC too uses it in that sense [...]"
> 
> Make it clearer that, in the context of tools/memory-model/, the term
> "memory-model" is used as shorthand for "memory consistency model" by
> calling out this convention in tools/memory-model/README.
> 
> Stick to the full name in sources' headers and for the subsystem name.
> 
> Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  tools/memory-model/MAINTAINERS       |  2 +-
>  tools/memory-model/README            | 14 +++++++-------
>  tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell |  2 +-
>  tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat  |  2 +-
>  4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>

Will