[PATCH 08/25] imx/mx1: rename files defining a machine to mach-$mach.c

[eric.y.miao@gmail.com (Eric Miao)]

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:06 AM, Mark Brown
<broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 05:29:16PM -0800, Amit Kucheria wrote:
>> On 10 Jan 08, Uwe Kleine-K??nig wrote:
>
>> > ?rename arch/arm/mach-mx1/{mx1ads.c => mach-mx1ads.c} (98%)
>> > ?rename arch/arm/mach-mx1/{scb9328.c => mach-scb9328.c} (98%)
>
>> Rethinking about this (based on a similar request for my i.MX5 submission), I
>> think renaming the boards to mach-* is a bad idea.
>
>> Other SoCs (davinci, omap, msm, nomadik, etc.) use the board-* convention. We
>> already use mach-* for the SoC directory names under arch/arm/. Naming the
>> boards with mach-* will just cause more confusion.
>
> Some other socs (at least the Samsung ones) are using mach- :/

Well, is the naming scheme so important in such a sense? Yes, now
git has made renaming quite a painless hassle, however, that's really
some needless thing IMHO.

PXA on the other way, doesn't come up with any board-* or mach-*
suffix, and no one seems complaining so far.

Orion and IXP, have <board-name>-setup.c, all looks fine to me as
long as they are consistent.

OTOH, sometimes there are core modules and base board (i.e.
motherboard), do we have to go to the extend to something like,
coreboard-* and motherboard-*. I doubt that.

So in a word,  as long as it's consistent all around.