Hi Simon, Laurent, On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 01:22:49PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:35:08PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: [snip] > > The naming convention is roughly <soc>-<board>.dts. For instance, in r8a7795- > > h3ulcb.dts, the SoC is R8A7795 and the board "H3 ULCB". With the proposed > > rename we would break that convention. > > > > However, the name ULCB itself (which stands for Ultra Low Cost Board) might > > already not follow the naming convention, as the boards are officially called > > R-Car Starter Kit (Pro and Premier). The V3M and V3H "low-cost" boards reflect > > that properly, with their .dts files named r8a77970-v3msk.dts and r8a77970- > > v3hsk.dts respectively. > > > > I'm not opposed to simplifying the file names, but I think we should then > > decide on a simpler convention. In particular the H3/M3 and V3 .dts files > > should in my opinion follow the same convention. > > > > I'll now let others comment on this as I don't have such a strong opinion on > > this topic. > > At this point I'd prefer to keep the current, albeit imperfect scheme, > and avoid churn. To be able to push a v2, I interpret this input as using below strings for the newly supported M3-N Starter Kit board: - r8a77965-m3nulcb.dts and r8a77965-m3nulcb-kf.dts for device tree sources - "renesas,m3nulcb" for compatible string - M3NULCB for board name in the shmobile.txt DT bindings I still think there is some redundancy in this naming scheme, but I can live with that. Thanks, Eugeniu.
