From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:22:08 -0300 From: Ezequiel Garcia To: Brian Norris Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: defconfigs: add MTD_SPI_NOR (new dependency for M25P80) Message-ID: <20140429192208.GA28668@arch.cereza> References: <1397719309-2022-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> <1397719309-2022-2-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> <535A8FC9.8040707@wwwdotorg.org> <20140429190603.GB9418@norris-Latitude-E6410> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20140429190603.GB9418@norris-Latitude-E6410> Cc: Marek Vasut , Russell King , Stephen Warren , Linux Kernel , Thierry Reding , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Shawn Guo , Sascha Hauer , Olof Johansson , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Apr 29, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:39:37AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > On 04/17/2014 01:21 AM, Brian Norris wrote: > > > These defconfigs contain the CONFIG_M25P80 symbol, which is now > > > dependent on the MTD_SPI_NOR symbol. Add CONFIG_MTD_SPI_NOR to the > > > relevant defconfigs. > > > > > > At the same time, drop the now-nonexistent CONFIG_MTD_CHAR symbol. > > > > I hadn't realized that the problem this patch solves was already present > > in the code, so this patch is simply catching up the defconfigs rather > > than part of a series which changed the code to cause the problem. > > Yes, this is "catching up the defconfigs." The SPI_NOR framework is new, > and I didn't want to generate defconfig noise until a few things > stabilized (particularly, its Kconfig symbol name). > > > So, this needs to be applied ASAP. > > > > I think this should be split it up so that each defconfig can go through > > the tree that owns it to avoid conflicts. If you repost split up, I can > > apply the tegra_defconfig change to the Tegra tree. > > OK, I'll try to split it up. Is ARM unique in tracking defconfigs in > separate trees? I assume MIPS, PowerPC, and Blackfin won't require the > same splitting? I'd like to avoid 31 patches when <20 could suffice. > > I'll also rebase on linux-next. I think there may be a few conflicts. > FWIW, I can take care of the patch for mvebu. Just drop it from your set and I'll prepare one for Jason. -- Ezequiel García, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com