From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:13:55 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v3 01/13] ARM: mvebu: rename armada-370-xp.c to
 armada-mvebu.c
In-Reply-To: <20140213130745.GU27395@titan.lakedaemon.net>
References: <1392289475-8902-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
 <1392289475-8902-2-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
 <2036226.egxWL7qC66@wuerfel> <20140213125526.3af08c54@skate>
 <20140213130745.GU27395@titan.lakedaemon.net>
Message-ID: <20140213141355.00e8f2fd@skate>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Dear Jason Cooper,

On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:07:45 -0500, Jason Cooper wrote:

> > > Your reasoning for the new name makes a lot of sense, but my personal
> > > opinion is that I'd rather leave the name as it is and deal with the
> > > fact that it's not the best name. Renaming files often causes unexpected
> > > problems, in particular if someone else wants to modify the same file.
> > 
> > I believe it's a matter of taste here. Having a file named
> > armada-370-xp.c that handles Armada 375 and Armada 38x looks highly
> > confusing to me, and I believe both Gr?gory and Ezequiel were of the
> > same opinion.
> > 
> > The number of changes to this file is very limited, so the probability
> > of having a large number of complicated patches touching the same file
> > being in flight is fairly low.
> > 
> > Maybe we can leave this taste decision to the mach-mvebu maintainers?
> 
> board-v7.c and then board-v5.c ?

Why not. But since this kind of change can be done without breaking the
DT compatibility, I'd first prefer to see Dove support merged into
mach-mvebu/ with its board file named mach-mvebu/dove.c. Then
progressively see what can be combined with armada-mvebu.c so that we
can merge both of them into board-v7.c.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com