[U-Boot-Users] [RFC] u-boot migration to kconfig

[Shinya Kuribayashi <skuribay@ruby.dti.ne.jp>]

Grant Likely wrote:
> On 9/23/07, Shinya Kuribayashi <skuribay@ruby.dti.ne.jp> wrote:
>> Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>>> It would be more useful to collect all boards
>>> using one specific chip in a single directory.
>>> arch/arm/<chip>/board.
>> This is too tight, isn't it?
>> Strictly speaking, boards are not related to chips (at least for me).
>> So I'll vote +1 for Jean's.
> 
> Just to throw a wrench in the works, what about boards like the Xilinx
> ML403 which can be *either* PowerPC or MicroBlaze.  :-)

I wanted to note doing <chip>/board is not much convinient
from the technical point of view. 

As ML403, NEC also has the platform board on which different
CPUs or different ARCHs are available.

> I still think sticking with the existing board/ directory (but perhaps
> organizing it better) makes the most sense.  Each board directory can
> pull in whatever cpu/soc support it needs.

So fully Agreed. I should have voted +1 for Wolfgang's.
Thanks for your clarification with a concrete example.


Thanks,

    Shinya Kuribayashi

P.S.
IMO even SOCs are not related to CPU ore CPU core.
From SoC point of view, CPU is just a piece of component.
But that's another story ;-)