From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sat, 28 Mar 2009 16:50:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:10708 "EHLO h5.dl5rb.org.uk") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20023955AbZC1Qu5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Mar 2009 16:50:57 +0000 Received: from h5.dl5rb.org.uk (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by h5.dl5rb.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2SGotwN007749; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:50:56 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by h5.dl5rb.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n2SGossk007747; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:50:54 +0100 Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:50:54 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Manuel Lauss Cc: Linux-MIPS Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Alchemy updates for 2.6.30 Message-ID: <20090328165053.GB23938@linux-mips.org> References: <1237999773-5174-1-git-send-email-mano@roarinelk.homelinux.net> <20090328150320.37bfd6be@scarran.roarinelk.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090328150320.37bfd6be@scarran.roarinelk.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 22163 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 03:03:20PM +0100, Manuel Lauss wrote: > > #5 I dislike the alchemy/common/platform.c file because it makes passing > > platform data to drivers ugly (the platdata struct and the consumer > > are in different files) and I also don't like the fact that every > > conceivable piece of alchemy hardware has a driver registered whether > > I like it or not. To not change existing behaviour, the platform.c > > file is now invoked by the board Makefiles instead of the one in common/. > > > > #6 Adds more complete DB1200 support (see patch for more info). > > Please ignore patches 5 and 6. I'm working on a better solution for > the problem #5 is supposed to fix, and #6 depends on a patch to the > 8250 driver which has not received any feedback. Okay, dropped. Ralf