From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 16:04:51 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH for-next 2/3] sunxi: kconfig: Add top-level TARGET_SUNXI In-Reply-To: <1414156950.15687.44.camel@hellion.org.uk> References: <20141006195402.91CD.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> <1414005269.20604.77.camel@hellion.org.uk> <20141024204646.CF7F.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> <1414156950.15687.44.camel@hellion.org.uk> Message-ID: <544A5C83.2030700@redhat.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi, On 10/24/2014 03:22 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2014-10-24 at 20:46 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> Hi Ian, >> >> >> On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:14:29 +0100 >> Ian Campbell wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 19:54 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >>>> Hi Ian >>>> >>>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 09:27:19 +0100 >>>> Ian Campbell wrote: >>>> Hi Ian, >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 10:39 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >>>>>> Hi Ian, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 4 Oct 2014 09:48:11 +0100 >>>>>> Ian Campbell wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> And make TARGET_SUN[457]I a choice variable under this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> configs updated with: >>>>>>> sed -i -e 's/^\+S:CONFIG_TARGET_SUN.I=y/+S:CONFIG_TARGET_SUNXI=y\n&/g' configs/* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps, is ARCH_SUNXI more familiar? >>>>> >>>>> I've no idea ;-) >>>>> >>>>> I think this is something which ought to be consistent within u-boot as >>>>> a whole. Seems we have a mixture of ARCH_FOO (DAVINCI, VERSATILE, >>>>> EXYNOS) and just FOO (TEGRA, ZYNQ). It does look like TARGET_FOO is all >>>>> individual boards though, which would make it inappropriate for SUNXI or >>>>> even SUN[4567]I. >>>> >>>> SoC/board select menu clean-up is on the way. >>>> I have to admit the naming convention is inconsistent now. >>>> >>>> CONFIG_ARCH_{DAVINCI, VERSATILE, EXYNOS} were added recently. >>>> If Xilinx/NVIDIA developers argree, we can rename >>>> CONFIG_{TEGRA, ZYNQ} -> CONFIG_ARCH_{TEGRA, ZYNQ} at some point. >>> >>> So we want CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI as well as CONFIG_ARCH_SUN[45678]I? Or did >>> you mean for the latter to remain CONFIG_TARGET_SUN[45678]I? >> >> >> I think the latter should remain CONFIG_TARGET_*. >> Or I think it is also OK to follow arch/arm/mach-sunxi/Kconfig of Linux. > > So either: CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI + CONFIG_TARGET_SUN[45678]I > Or: CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI + CONFIG_MACH_SUN[45679]I? > > I'm not too fussed but I think the second sounds good and leaves > CONFIG_TARGET_* available for the individual boards if we end up > wanting/needing that. Sound good to everyone? Works for me. Regards, Hans