46dcfc8 (ARM: Update mach-types) removes used machine types

[linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 01:18:25PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Monday, August 22, 2011 10:33:29 AM Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 09:17:49AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:10:00AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> > > > Hello Russell,
> > > > 
> > > > your commit 46dcfc8 that is in today's next among other changes does:
> > > > 
> > > > -eukrea_cpuimx25sd      MACH_EUKREA_CPUIMX25    EUKREA_CPUIMX25 2820
> > > > -eukrea_cpuimx35sd      MACH_EUKREA_CPUIMX35    EUKREA_CPUIMX35 2821
> > > > 
> > > > These two are both marked as "mainlined" on
> > > > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/machines/ and both are actually
> > > > used (arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-{eukrea_cpuimx25,cpuimx35.c})
> > > > 
> > > > Can you please add them back? Maybe it's worth to double-check the
> > > > other deletions?!
> > > 
> > > No.  They're removed because they're broken (look at them) - I've added
> > > additional checks so I don't have to waste _significant_ time fixing
> > > the entries time and time again.
> > > 
> > > The requirement is that the machine_is_xxx() must match the MACH_xxx
> > > parts.  If they don't, they will not exist in future updates.
> > 
> > Ah, I wasn't aware of that requirement.
> > 
> > Eric, these machine types are owned by you. Do you care to follow up?
> 
> Hi Russell,
> 
> maybe it'd be worth at least pinging the people before you kill off the machine 
> so they can come up with fix?

I've no idea which get killed off, sorry.