From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 01:25:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] ARM: shmobile: ape6evm: multiplatform support Message-Id: <20141218012501.GA6142@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <1418747163-21729-1-git-send-email-ulrich.hecht+renesas@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1418747163-21729-1-git-send-email-ulrich.hecht+renesas@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 10:22:00AM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 05:20:15PM +0100, Ulrich Hecht wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Magnus Damm wrote: > >> > Hi Ulrich and Simon, > >> > > >> > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Ulrich Hecht > >> > wrote: > >> >> It is split in such a way that the first five patches can be merged without > >> >> breaking either of the two legacy platforms. Simon, please pick those up. > >> >> (Or the first three, if adding a multiplatform target that does not build is > >> >> a problem.) Thank you. > >> > > >> > The first patch seems to have some issue reported by Laurent. It needs > >> > to be reworked. > >> > > >> > Patch 2-5 should be possible to merge as-is unless I'm mistaken. > >> > > >> > Simon, if you don't mind, can you please consider picking up 2-5 before 1, 6-7? > >> > >> I respun the series following Laurent's suggestions, there should be > >> no need for special-casing anymore. > >> > >> > As for patch 6-7 and the sh73a4 legacy removal code by Laurent, I > >> > think the main blocker there is the r8a73a4 CCF support patch. I don't > >> > want to remove legacy code before reference is at least half-complete. > >> > > >> > How can we move forward on the r8a73a4 CCF bits? > >> > >> For starters I have sent a new version of the series with the last > >> remaining trivialities fixed. > > > > Thanks, that seems clean to me. And I see that Laurent has Acked the > > changes. I will queue those up. > > Thanks. I assume you guys work out the CCF vs the shmobile ordering > and keep at least one DT-reference implementation working at any given > time. Yes, that is the assumption that I am working on.