* Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> [181206 22:12]: > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 5:57 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:30 AM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > We discussed merging all ARM reference design mach-* to one dir > > > if I just name that mach-arm then we get a convergence to the > > > vendor name in some organic way. > > > > TBC, you want .../boot/dts/arm/* for all the ARM, Ltd boards? Just > > making sure as you were arguing against vendor names. :) > > I am not against vendor names, but I am also for SoC > names because I think whatever makes most sense should > be the rule, so both/and not either/or. One does not exclude > the other. It's just a name. > > In this case what > I meant was that while we (me and Arnd) originally discussed > merging it all into mach-versatile (how would you know) > if I instead merge it all into mach-arm, we get a 1:1 correspondence > between mach-dir and vendor name and DTS dir so everyone > is happy. With the number of trade names we've already seen with the TI SoCs, I'd probably prefer arch/arm/boot/dts/ti. What used to be omap is now dra7 and am437x and so on. And for timing, doing this just before -rc1 gets tagged seems like a good time to do it. At least I have still pending large dts changes waiting that I'd rather not send a pull request out for until next week :) Regards, Tony
