From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 17:10:33 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH
Message-Id: <52446A89.1080409@nod.at>
List-Id: <linux-sh.vger.kernel.org>
References: <1377073172-3662-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <1377073172-3662-3-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <CALkWK0kCrQ9hPABD_XQ9QFG-vByP+xZWZs+RkVK77+cX7Odz7g@mail.gmail.com> <52441025.9030308@nod.at> <CALkWK0k5neR50h+AWEF5AgnpbgWMitZUnbv_caVzt6HiUA6mXg@mail.gmail.com> <52441407.9010603@nod.at> <CALkWK0=FG4COEjv5+mu1JRiiFQ2k6vop1mhFPmAT4bjtYeK6nA@mail.gmail.com> <52442108.1020304@nod.at> <CALkWK0nm=9n7DiV0MaGKVLMs=vxAiiQUx=OFuOg-DinkdMej5A@mail.gmail.com> <CALkWK0ndMtyQxE0uK4H-Ly6oy+tRn-SFc=_1WoC2QAp2uy0dtw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMuHMdU3LdDhbp_AKjD7b8Wytbqfp29DrPwTdtwQa2hUNdcy3Q@mail.gmail.com> <524443AC.3040409@nod.at> <CALkWK0kcd03t9W4O24wiVBQ8SZQ8ZcrbvQaUkcCm+y5n=d1wPw@mail.gmail.com> <52444CED.40401@nod.at> <CALkWK0=u8CdtmbaOtA5=jxuWsei2ZQhxDwSsnhAR=ZRBNyoH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALkWK0=u8CdtmbaOtA5=jxuWsei2ZQhxDwSsnhAR=ZRBNyoH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>, Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>, Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>, linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>, Linux MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>, uml-devel <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

Am 26.09.2013 18:06, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra:
> Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> And, of course, this makes your patch valid.
>> Can you also please ensure that your new defconfigs are minimal?
> 
> Yeah, it's close to a minimal configuration for the 3.10 kernel
> (latest at the time of patch submission). I was aiming to minimize the
> diff between the current defconfig and the two new defconfigs in
> configs/. The slim diffstat does the talking:
> 
>  arch/um/Kconfig.common                          |   5 -
>  arch/um/Makefile                                |  11 ++
>  arch/um/{defconfig => configs/i386_defconfig}   | 209 +++++++++++++-------
>  arch/um/{defconfig => configs/x86_64_defconfig} | 250 +++++++++++++++---------
>  arch/x86/um/Kconfig                             |   5 +
>  5 files changed, 306 insertions(+), 174 deletions(-)
>  copy arch/um/{defconfig => configs/i386_defconfig} (86%)
>  rename arch/um/{defconfig => configs/x86_64_defconfig} (83%)
> 
> If we find some deficiencies, we can always update it. For now, please
> commit these two patches.

Please resend them with savedefconfig applied.
There is no need to have three commits for that.

Thanks,
//richard