From: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] arm: add CONFIG_MACH_TYPE option and documentation
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 18:12:20 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E1329D4.3080408@compulab.co.il> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110705140836.GA1927@harvey-pc.matrox.com>
On 07/05/11 17:08, charvey at matrox.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 12:16:12AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Christopher Harvey,
>>
>> In message <20110704210619.GA3218@harvey-pc.matrox.com> you wrote:
>>> I'm curious, is it a feature that bd->bi_arch_number can be set at
>>> runtime? Do any boards actually make a decision about what value to
>> Yes, this is a feature. It comes in handy in a number of cases.
>>
>>> set this to? If not, then maybe it should be a required value. I've
>> Why?
> Because if every machine sets an essentially static value at runtime
> then it would be a nice compile-time check to do. But, there is no
> point since the bi_arch_number isn't fixed for each u-boot
> configuration.
Right.
>>> submitted some patches that deal with the same sort of issue, so I'm
>>> interested in seeing that happens to this one.
>> Sorry, I can't follow...
> I was refering to this patch:
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/103149/
> which is similar.
No, you are wrong! It is not similar even a bit! It does completely different thing.
Your patch: warns about machine type not set.
My patch: just adds a configuration _option_ which you can use, but you don't have to.
See... It is not the same!
--
Regards,
Igor.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-05 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-04 9:00 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] arm: add CONFIG_MACH_TYPE option and documentation Igor Grinberg
2011-07-04 9:00 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] arm: nvidia and smdk6400: use common code for machine type Igor Grinberg
2011-07-04 9:00 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] arm: omap: innovator: " Igor Grinberg
2011-07-04 21:06 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] arm: add CONFIG_MACH_TYPE option and documentation Christopher Harvey
2011-07-04 22:03 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-04 22:03 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-04 22:16 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-07-05 14:08 ` charvey at matrox.com
2011-07-05 15:12 ` Igor Grinberg [this message]
2011-07-05 7:10 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-06 18:53 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-06 20:05 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-07 16:07 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-07 16:51 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-07 17:46 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-07 21:06 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-13 5:52 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-14 14:10 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-14 14:20 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-14 14:57 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-14 15:45 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] arm: add CONFIG_MACH_TYPE setting " Igor Grinberg
2011-07-17 6:56 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-17 9:10 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-17 9:08 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-07-27 10:31 ` Chander Kashyap
2011-07-27 13:04 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-28 6:41 ` Chander Kashyap
2011-07-28 7:59 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-07-28 8:19 ` Chander Kashyap
2011-07-28 8:58 ` Igor Grinberg
2011-08-04 12:05 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2011-08-11 4:16 ` Chander Kashyap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E1329D4.3080408@compulab.co.il \
--to=grinberg@compulab.co.il \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.