From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk (Ben Dooks) Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 13:03:33 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] arm: Add basic support for new Marvell Armada SoC family In-Reply-To: <20120518192011.GD24238@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <1337072084-21967-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <201205161946.34179.arnd@arndb.de> <201205162034.49392.arnd@arndb.de> <20120518192011.GD24238@titan.lakedaemon.net> Message-ID: <4FBB8095.4070402@codethink.co.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 18/05/12 20:20, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 08:34:49PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Wednesday 16 May 2012, Nicolas Pitre wrote: >>> In this case, we have wildly different names referring to the same chip >>> family, and "orion" is far from hinting that it also constitute the >>> support for Kirkwood, Dove or (some not all) Armadas, unless you are >>> familiar with some legacy Marvell products. This is why in this case I >>> think that a directory name change might be appropriate, especially if >>> we're going to cause churn by moving things around already. >>> >>> I agree that mrvl_ebu_* is not pretty. This could be mv_ebu_* or >>> mvebu_*. Unless someone has another logical identifier to suggest which >>> would capture all that family of SOCs that came out of EBU in Marvell of >>> course. >>> >>> Since this is code not marketing, we don't have to have something flashy >>> either, as long as it doesn't create more confusion than "orion" does. >>> The various Kconfig help texts are good places to put all the marketing >>> names du jour. >> >> mvebu sounds reasonable to me, it's definitely unique and it's almost a >> word ;-) > > mvebuntu? *ducks* you, sir, are clearly quackers. -- Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/ Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius