linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/14] lemote: Loongson2F based machines support

To: yanhua <yanh@lemote.com>, Arnaud Patard <apatard@mandriva.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, 彭亮锦 <penglj@lemote.com>, "zhangfx@lemote.com" <zhangfx@lemote.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/14] lemote: Loongson2F based machines support
From: yanhua <yanh@lemote.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:25:54 +0800
In-reply-to: <20090413113640.GB6137@adriano.hkcable.com.hk>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <49DD7E88.7040305@lemote.com> <m3prfm6x1d.fsf@anduin.mandriva.com> <49DDB965.3060200@lemote.com> <20090413113640.GB6137@adriano.hkcable.com.hk>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
Zhang Le 写道:
On 17:01 Thu 09 Apr     , yanhua wrote:
[snip]
This is just for historical reasons. Before, we have loongson2e machines named as fulong(from loogson2f, changeed to fuloong) merged into main kernel.

I suggest we might as well change fulong to fuloong2e, while call 2f based
fuloong fuloong2f (or something similar, you get the idea).

Because, fulong and fuloong are almost indistinguishable, neither on spelling
nor on pronunciation.

Yes, We will rearrange the directory structure and make they share the common code.
Of course, we can deal with fulong(2e) later. However, I strongly suggest we get
fuloong2f right in the first place.

Zhang, Le



--
晏华



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>