On Fri 2018-06-29 13:46:46, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 11:46:07AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> > > > Finally, note that documentation (including kerneldoc) remains to be
> > > > written, but hopefully this will not hinder review given that the
> > > > current interfaces are fairly self-describing.
> > > 
> > > This all looks great.  Thanks for doing this work and adding a new
> > > subsystem for something that has been asked for for many years.
> > > 
> > > All now merged in my tree, nice job!
> > 
> > I don't think discussion was finished on this one.
> > 
> > In particular, we agreed that /dev/gnssrawX would be better device
> > name, so that we still have place where to put proper abstraction
> > layer in future.
> 
> I did not agree with you on that. I said we could consider that name if
> this was to be changed at all, which I do not think is necessary for
> the reasons spelled out in this thread.

So, again: there's nothing gnss specific in those patches. It does not
know about the format of the data passed around. (Best you can claim
that somehow data flow characteristics are unique to gnss.) And this
takes namespace needed for real gnss subsystem. Please don't do it.

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html