Re: [PATCH v2 00/27] Add support for OpenCAPI SCM devices

[Dan Williams]

On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 4:43 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 03:01:17PM +1100, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 19:50 -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 02:46:28PM +1100, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> > > > This series adds support for OpenCAPI SCM devices, exposing
> > >
> > > Could we _not_ introduce yet another term for persistent memory?
> > >
> >
> > "Storage Class Memory" is an industry wide term, and is used repeatedly
> > in the device specifications. It's not something that has been pulled
> > out of thin air.
>
> "Somebody else also wrote down Storage Class Memory".  Don't care.
> Google gets 750k hits for Persistent Memory and 150k hits for
> Storage Class Memory.  This term lost.
>
> > The term is also already in use within the 'papr_scm' driver.
>
> The acronym "SCM" is already in use.  Socket Control Messages go back
> to early Unix (SCM_RIGHTS, SCM_CREDENTIALS, etc).  Really, you're just
> making the case that IBM already uses the term SCM.  You should stop.

I tend to agree. The naming of things under
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ is not under my purview, but
drivers/nvdimm/ is. Since this driver is colocated with the "pmem"
driver let's not proliferate the "scm" vs "pmem" confusion.