[U-Boot] [PATCH for-next 2/3] sunxi: kconfig: Add top-level TARGET_SUNXI

[Ian Campbell]

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 <ijc at 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 <ijc at 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 <ijc at 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.