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 <i...@hellion.org.uk> 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 <i...@hellion.org.uk> 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 <i...@hellion.org.uk> > > > > > > > > > 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? Ian. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot