From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 09:24:04 +0000 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Renesas ARM Based SoC Koelsch Board Removal Updates for v3.19 Message-Id: <20141120092400.GA2314@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <201411192306.43386.arnd@arndb.de> <20141120004003.GB5065@verge.net.au> <236694577.ualUuEDmHa@wuerfel> In-Reply-To: <236694577.ualUuEDmHa@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 08:33:48AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 20 November 2014 09:40:03 Simon Horman wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:06:43PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Tuesday 04 November 2014, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Renesas ARM Based SoC Koelsch Board Removal Updates for v3.19 > > > > > > > > * Remove lecacy C koelsh board support > > > > > > I've tried merging this one in two ways, but I'm not too happy about either one: > > > > > > - we could put it into next/boards, but I don't think there will be anything > > > else in that branch and I was considering not to have one at all. > > > > > > - it would also fit into next/cleanup, but then we already have > > > renesas-dt-cleanups-for-v3.19 categorized as "next/dt" rather than > > > "next/cleanup". Moving that one into cleanups solves the problem > > > nicely, but it's rather large and my feeling is that Olof's decision > > > to put it into next/dt was better. > > > > My assumption was that it is reasonable to base something on a cleanup > > and that as the other base for this is next/dt the this pull request > > would also end up in next/dt. > > Correct in principle. Sometimes however we decide to put things into > a different branch than what you had planned, and this is what happened > here when Olof put the dt-cleanup into next/dt, which we normally do > for pull requests that only touch the dts files. Thanks for the clarification. > > > I think you are trying too hard to avoid merge conflicts, as I can't see any > > > true dependency on renesas-dt-cleanups-for-v3.19, and I'd be happier if > > > you could rebase it onto renesas-dt-du-for-v3.19 by itself. There is > > > a trivial merge conflict that I have to resolve, but it seems more > > > sensible that way. > > > > > > Any other thoughts? > > > > Unfortunately its not quite so simple. The patch > > > > "ARM: shmobile: koelsch dts: Drop console= bootargs parameter" > > in renesas-koelsch-board-removal-for-v3.19 depends on > > "ARM: shmobile: kzm9g-reference dts: Add chosen/stdout-path" > > which is on renesas-dt-cleanups-for-v3.19. > > > > Perhaps it would be better if the latter had not been classified as a > > cleanup. On that topic I must say that I find splitting out > > some patches as cleanups to not be a very useful classification for me. > > > > A possibility would be to duplicate "ARM: shmobile: kzm9g-reference dts: > > Add chosen/stdout-path" in a revised renesas-koelsch-board-removal-for-v3.19. > > I believe that would leave us with only a trivial conflict in > > arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile. > > Thanks for the explanation. I think the best way forward is to just > classify both renesas-dt-cleanups-for-v3.19 and renesas-koelsch-board-removal-for-v3.19 > as cleanups then, which I've done. The dt-cleanup is now in both > next/cleanup and next/dt, while dt-cleanup2 and dt-cleanup3 remain > just in next/dt. Thanks, I appreciate it. Its nice to get these changes into (and some legacy code out of) v3.19.