From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751366AbdHEFND (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Aug 2017 01:13:03 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:33380 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751221AbdHEFNB (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Aug 2017 01:13:01 -0400 Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2017 07:12:15 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Kani, Toshimitsu" Cc: "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "mchehab@kernel.org" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_oemlist() interface Message-ID: <20170805051215.GA23214@nazgul.tnic> References: <20170803215753.30553-1-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170803215753.30553-2-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170804034206.GB12082@nazgul.tnic> <1501878602.2042.113.camel@hpe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1501878602.2042.113.camel@hpe.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 08:39:35PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > Well, we did talk a lot about your suggested name, "acpi_blacklist", > and I explained that it did not work since it'd be used for both black > and white-list. We've agreed on that. > > You then suggested it's "platform", not "OEM". Since this is an ACPI > structure defined in "acpi.h", its terminology generally follows ACPI > spec, which I did. > > I understand that you feel strongly against "OEM" (sorry about that). > How about "acpi_platform_list"? Does it work for you? Yes, I thought we agreed on all that. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --