Re: [PATCH 2/3] docs: consolidate peripheral interfaces

[Jonathan Corbet]

Costa Shulyupin <costa.shul@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> to make the page more organized as requested
>
> Signed-off-by: Costa Shulyupin <costa.shul@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/subsystem-apis.rst | 15 +++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/subsystem-apis.rst b/Documentation/subsystem-apis.rst
> index 90a0535a932a..7b086c89e2be 100644
> --- a/Documentation/subsystem-apis.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/subsystem-apis.rst
> @@ -48,6 +48,17 @@ Networking interfaces
>     isdn/index
>     mhi/index
>  
> +Peripheral interfaces
> +----------------------
> +
> +.. toctree::
> +   :maxdepth: 1
> +
> +   usb/index
> +   PCI/index
> +   hwmon/index
> +   leds/index
> +
>  Storage interfaces
>  ------------------
>  
> @@ -70,19 +81,15 @@ Storage interfaces
>     fpga/index
>     i2c/index
>     iio/index
> -   leds/index
>     pcmcia/index
>     spi/index
>     w1/index
>     watchdog/index
>     virt/index
> -   hwmon/index
>     accel/index
>     security/index
>     crypto/index
>     bpf/index
> -   usb/index
> -   PCI/index
>     misc-devices/index
>     peci/index
>     wmi/index

So this one seems a bit less well thought out.  How are you defining
"peripheral interface"?  How is it that PCI qualifies but, say, PCMCIA
does not?  In a real sense, most of our interfaces deal with peripherals
in one way or another.

Were you thinking maybe of "bus interfaces"?  If so, a somewhat
different selection would be indicated.

Thanks,

jon