I can see how it'd be >> nice to split up boards into CPU directories, but we'd have to discuss >> some of the warts, like where vendor-specific code would be located if >> we went down that path. > > Right. I can see arguments pro and con each of the approaches, and I > must admit that I have no telling argument for either. > > My gut feeling is that I like the existing board/ approach better, but > I'm open to arguments.
Here a pair of arguments... Most boards are very similar to the original evaluation kit. For example, within Nomadik, code for the Calao USB-S8815 is not much different from code for the NHK8815 evaluation board. But Wolfgang refused my patch as the files are very similar; I asked how to proceed, with no reply so far. Note that both board/calao and board/st exist (board/st only has 1 board, though). Similarly, I'm working on a dave-tech.eu board series based on ep9302-ep9315. board/edb93xx exists but "edb" is the evaluation board; mine should be board/dave/zefeer (board/dave already exists), though very similar to edb93xx code. Hope these are arguments WD would consider. Moreover, vendors switch names often, cpu families do it rarely. /alessandro _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
