Hello Wolfgang, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <200907181115.26404.rg...@blackfin.uclinux.org> you wrote: >> It would be nice to come up with some list of namespaces, and what they >> they should be used for... > > Agreed. > >> For example, should it be: >> CONFIG_DRIVER_OMAP24XX_I2C >> or >> CONFIG_SYS_I2C_DRIVER_OMAP24XX >> or >> CONFIG_DRIVER_I2C_OMAP24XX > > Well, the difference between CONFIG_ and CONFIG_SYS_ is well-defined. > > And the "DRIVER_" part makes not much sense to me in any of the > examples above.
Agreed. > My personal way of thinking about such options is usually CPU/archi- > tecture first, so I would probably chose CONFIG_OMAP24XX_I2C to en- > able/disable the I2C driver on a OMAP24XX based board, but I under- > stand that there are reasons to prefer CONFIG_I2C_OMAP24XX as well - > let's see if there is a clear majority of opiniions... I vote for CONFIG_I2C_xxx because we collect all i2c drivers in drivers/i2c without considering the plattform, so I think CONFIG_I2C_ represents better the code structure. >> Again - which is only used in one place: >> drivers/i2c/Makefile:COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_OMAP24XX_I2C) += omap24xx_i2c.o >> include/configs/omap2420h4.h:#define CONFIG_DRIVER_OMAP24XX_I2C >> >> Which is fine - since it is a driver, which I'm sure that people out of tree >> use. > > Well, if only out-of-tree ports use it, it probably should never have > been added in the first place. > >> I would think should be CONFIG_DRIVERS_PATA_BFIN > > I dosagree, the "DRIVERS" part is just added line noise. Yep. bye Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
