On 12 Mar 2015, at 14:39, Jérôme Forissier jerome.forissier@linaro.org wrote:
On 03/12/2015 06:56 PM, Javier González wrote: Hi Jens,
Good idea putting it into code. Thanks for doing it :)
On 12 Mar 2015, at 10:00, Joakim Bech joakim.bech@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Jens and Jerome,
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 09:50:43AM +0100, Jerome Forissier wrote: Hi Jens,
On 03/12/2015 08:14 AM, Jens Wiklander wrote:
[...]
Signed-off-by: Jens Wiklander jens.wiklander@linaro.org
Documentation/ioctl/ioctl-number.txt | 1 + include/linux/sechw/tee.h | 154 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
'sechw' looks a bit weird to me; 'sec' or 'sec_hw' maybe?
It's possible to change, I think this suggestion was coming from Javier initially.
I am good with sec_hw if that makes more sense to you. Normally in /drivers/ we do not find “_” in names, that is why I proposed sechw. The idea is to have a “secure hawrdware” submodule where we can eventually move TPM and other secure coprocessors.
"Secure hardware" sounds good. The thing is, in French we tend to read "sechw" as "sech" + "w" because "ch" is a consonant sound on its own (like "sh" in English). Now, it is true that the kernel sources have dashes more often than underscores, so I change my vote to "sec-hw".
Thanks for the explanation. sec-hw sounds good :)
jerome@jfw540:~/work/linux (master)$ find . -type d -name '*-*' | wc -l 295 jerome@jfw540:~/work/linux (master)$ find . -type d -name '*_*' | wc -l 77
But then we shouldn't care too much about how a frog-eater would read the name of a kernel directory, right? ;)
:p
Cheers,
Jerome
Best, Javier