From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 00:46:48 +0000 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Renesas ARM-based SoC defconfig for v3.8 Message-Id: <20121101004647.GA3598@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <1350448698-26985-1-git-send-email-horms@verge.net.au> <20121030074508.GG12329@verge.net.au> <201210302141.27919.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <201210302141.27919.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:41:27PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 30 October 2012, Simon Horman wrote: > > While I am more than happy to help address the issues raised in this > > thread, and others that arise. There do seem to be a number of issues > > between where we are now and a more generic shmobile_defconfig. I would > > like consideration given to allowing the exixting, working, well-maintained, > > per-board defconfigs to be updated until these issues have been resolved. > > Yes, no problem. This seemed like a low-hanging fruit initially but has > turned into something much bigger now. > > Instead of attacking all these at ones, we can leave them as something > worthwhile doing later. I noticed that out of the 11 shmobile defconfigs, > only three (marzen, kzm9d and kzm9g) actually have a nonzero MEMORY_START. > > Maybe it's possible to consolidate all or some of the others first, since > they should still work with the same uImage at the expense of just making > the early debugging a little harder, as we discussed earlier. > > For all I know, these three boards are also the ones seeing the most > ongoing development, so you could start by using a shared defconfig > for the oldest (ARM11 based) boards at first that are also less likely > to impact new development starting from the defconfig. Thanks, good observations. I will look into that. My expectation is that marzen and kzm9g will continue to see heavy development in the near future.