2015-08-07 19:02 GMT+09:00 Marek Vasut marex@denx.de:
On Friday, August 07, 2015 at 09:33:02 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
Hi Peng, Soeren,
Hi,
On 07/08/2015 09:19, Soeren Moch wrote:
Peng,
Sorry for being unclear here.
In your patch you add several options in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig under "MX6 board select". Some of these options are named "Support <boardname>" (e.g. "Support udoo"), while others are simply called "<boardname>" (e.g. "Bachmann OT1200").
I would prefer the simple "<boardname>" naming style for all options and remove the word "Support" from all description strings. But this is only my personal opinion and a minor cosmetic change.
Checking in other architecture, I see there is no rule about this. Even in the same Kconfig (AT91), there is a mix with and without "Support". Both are ok - decide yourself.
The "Support" is implicit (you won't select it if you didn't want to support that board, would you?), so please use just the board name.
The prompts "Support <lower-case board name>" were automatically created by tool based on boards.cfg when U-boot switched to Kconfig.
Later, some of them were rephrased without "Support" by hand.
In other words, the boards with "Support" have been untouched since the automatic conversion.
Actually, arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig has a mix with and without "Support". I only rephrased the boards which have device trees in Linux Kernel, because device trees often include official board names. I could not find the better names for the others.
Better prompts are always welcome.