From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: aspotashev@emcraft.com (Alexander Potashev)
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 15:21:03 +0400
Subject: Renaming MACH_TYPE_KINETIS_K60 into MACH_TYPE_KINETIS
In-Reply-To: <20120103110337.GM2914@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1325065882.1584.153.camel@skywanderer.emcraft.com>
 <20120103110337.GM2914@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <2101657.NNXDtBpq3c@myhost>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi Russell,

On 3 ?????? 2012 11:03:37 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> I notice that you sent me a very similar email on 24th December, which I
> haven't responded to yet: given that it's the Christmas period, and
> people take holidays, I think you're being a little hasty over your
> resending.

The reason why I have re-sent the message to the mailing list was that I 
feeled like this discussion should be public, not just that I was bored 
waiting for the response.

Anyway, sorry for the noise.

> In any case, yes, I can change it.  However, as has already been
> pointed out, we're moving over to using device tree as the primary form
> of platform differentiation.  With device tree, machine type numbers
> are completely meaningless (and aren't actually used by the kernel.)

Thanks in advance for fixing the entry!

> While I will fix the entry, I suspect that Arnd will now refuse to
> merge any new SoC support for mainline which is not using the device
> tree.

Linux kernel development in our company is still based on the 2.6.33 version 
of the kernel. Most of our code is not going to be sent upstream. We will 
probably think about FDT when upgrading to a newer version of the kernel.


-- 
Regards,
Alexander