Le vendredi 17 avril 2015 à 01:53 -0700, Jens Lucius a écrit : > Am Freitag, 17. April 2015 10:05:02 UTC+2 schrieb Maxime Ripard: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:34:42PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-04-15 at 21:17 +0200, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > > Well, the discussion has started on the other part of the > thread. I > > > think we've agreed so far that it should be: > [Vendor]_[Device], except > > > in a few cases where [Vendor]_ should be omitted: > > [...] > > > * When the device can clearly be identified without > mentioning the > > > vendor, due to a certain renown in the community: I'm > thinking of > > > Cubieboard, Cubietruck and the Olimex devices. This > clearly doesn't > > > apply to devices like the AW1 produced by Ainol. > > > > Who is the arbiter of when this exception applies? It sounds > unworkable > > to me, or at least it isn't going to lead to any kind of > consistency. > > > > Perhaps the vendor should always be a formal part of the > name, and > > always present in place which constitute an ABI (like DTB > filenames) but > > can be omitted by default in other places (such as wiki page > names), > > unless there is ambiguity (in which case it's included). > > I really don't know about that one, but I'd feel like having a > DT > called sun4i-a10-olimex-a10-olinuxino.dtb would be kind of bad > as > well. > > At first the dts name you mentioned does not look that good, but > actually it would help identify and sort devices. I can clearly see > the manufactor of that device and it is sorted by architecture - cpu - > vendor - name, so all olimex devies would be together (when > alphabetically sorted). I think most people know the olimex devices > like the olinuxino, but what about the olimex A20 som for example > (which hasn´t a dts yet). What should be the name of that? > sun7i-a20-a20som isn´t very informative. It´s not an Olinuxino device > (Olimex said that these are always OSHW) so the best solution would be > to call it sun7i-a20-olimex-a20som, which would be consistent to the > naming scheme.
Well, I agree with you there, that's a good point. I think we should give up the idea of making exceptions and go with always using the vendor name in the file names and targets. I think we should do that too for devices that have a device-tree source that we cannot rename. This will cause a lack of consistency between sunxi-boards, U-Boot, the wiki on the one hand and Linux on the other for those devices, but since the problem is in the kernel, it's only fair that only the kernel keeps the inconsistent naming and not the other way round. I have started a git repo with the list of currently supported (from either one of the projects of interest) sunxi devices: http://git.code.paulk.fr/gitweb/?p=sunxi-devices.git;a=summary A handful of devices still don't have wiki pages despite having U-Boot, Linux and sunxi-boards support. I will start drawing the proposed new names from that list, with comments each time, when possible. -- Paul Kocialkowski, Replicant developer Replicant is a fully free Android distribution running on several devices, a free software mobile operating system putting the emphasis on freedom and privacy/security. Website: http://www.replicant.us/ Blog: http://blog.replicant.us/ Wiki/tracker/forums: http://redmine.replicant.us/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
