Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] powerpc/platforms: Move files from 4xx to 44x

[Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>]

Le 31/03/2020 à 18:04, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 5:26 PM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> wrote:
>> Le 31/03/2020 à 17:14, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:49 AM Christophe Leroy
>>> <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Only 44x uses 4xx now, so only keep one directory.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/Makefile           |  9 +++++++-
>>>>    arch/powerpc/platforms/{4xx => 44x}/cpm.c     |  0
>>>
>>> No objections to moving everything into one place, but I wonder if the
>>> combined name should be 4xx instead of 44x, given that 44x currently
>>> include 46x and 47x. OTOH your approach has the advantage of
>>> moving fewer files.
>>>
>>
>> In that case, should we also rename CONFIG_44x to CONFIG_4xx ?
> 
> That has the risk of breaking user's defconfig files, but given the
> small number of users, it may be nicer for consistency. In either
> case, the two symbols should probably hang around as synonyms,
> the question is just which one is user visible.
> 

Not sure it is a good idea to keep two synonyms. In the past we made our 
best to remove synonyms (We had CONFIG_8xx and CONFIG_PPC_8xx being 
synonyms, we had CONFIG_6xx and CONFIG_BOOK3S_32 and 
CONFIG_PPC_STD_MMU_32 being synonyms).
I think it is a lot cleaner when we can avoid synonyms.

By the way I already dropped CONFIG_4xx in previous patch (8/11). It was 
not many 4xx changed to 44x. It would be a lot more in the other way 
round I'm afraid.

But I agree with you it might be more natural to change to 4xx.

Michael, any preference ?

Christophe