Hi Ian, 2014-10-24 22:22 GMT+09:00 Ian Campbell <i...@hellion.org.uk>: > 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 <i...@hellion.org.uk> 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 <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? >> >> >> 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 personally prefer the latter. > 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? Fully agreed with your "[U-Boot,v2,0/7] sunxi: Kconfig consolidation and cleanup" series. Thank you! -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot