From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750805AbWDSOlI (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:41:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750807AbWDSOlI (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:41:08 -0400 Received: from el02.a5.com ([216.201.112.39]:913 "EHLO el02.a5.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750805AbWDSOlG (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:41:06 -0400 X-ClientAddr: 207.179.227.39 Message-ID: <44464BD3.3060708@billgatliff.com> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:40:19 -0500 From: Bill Gatliff User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20051002) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: rename arch/arm/mach-s3c2410 to arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx References: <20060418165204.GG2516@trinity.fluff.org> <4446187C.2090603@andric.com> In-Reply-To: <4446187C.2090603@andric.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-A5COM-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-A5COM-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: bgat@billgatliff.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dimitry: Dimitry Andric wrote: >Ben Dooks wrote: > > >>With the advent of the s3c2410 port adding support for >>more of the samsung SoC product line (s3c2440, s3c2442, >>s3c2400) there have been several requests by other people >>to rename the (in their opinion) increasingly inaccurate >>arch/arm/mach-s3c2410 to arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx. >> >> > >Well, if you start this way, you might also consider renaming it to >mach-s3cxxxx, since Samsung also seems to have S3C3410, S3C44B0 and who >knows what else. Otherwise you'd maybe have to do such an operation >again in the future... > >Also, I've always found the dichotomy of having >"include/asm-arm/arch-s3c2410" and "arch/arm/mach-s3c2410" rather weird. >Isn't s3cxxxx an "architecture", instead of a specific machine? If so, >arch/arm/arch-s3cxxxx would be more logical. > > I always interpreted the arch/arm directories to be "machines based on the s3cxxxx", etc. Thus, in my world there's no dichotomy. But hey, that's just one person's world. :) >Anyway, by starting to rename directories, you start a never-ending >quest, and you'll stress the abilities of most version control systems >too. Your huge diff for just one rename operation already shows this. > > It doesn't stress GNU Arch, and I bet it doesn't stress SVN or Cogito. What it does do is make the kernel code appear more obvious and better organized, which I see as being a good thing for future maintainability's sake alone. So I'm all for these changes. >There are certainly a lot more directories (also not specifically >arm-related ones) in the Linux kernel source that could be renamed to be >more logical, but I'd say the cost is rather large. E.g. difficulty >merging patches on older kernels and other version control difficulties. > > Well, now's our chance to find out whose VC systems we break. :) And I don't see the "moving patches forward from older kernels" as being an argument for locking down the current/future state of the kernel sources. Respectfully, b.g. -- Bill Gatliff bgat@billgatliff.com