Re: [PATCH] powerpc: sort Kconfig selects under CONFIG_PPC

[Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>]

Hi Michael,

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:56:12 +1100 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
> > On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:30:02 +1100 Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com> wrote:  
> >>
> >> config PPC has a lot of selects under it. They're not sorted in any
> >> particular order, leading to merge conflicts when adding items at the end.
> >> 
> >> Sort them alphabetically.  
> >
> > Excellent, thanks.
> >  
> >> Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >> 
> >> On top of linux-next 20170130  
> >
> > Probably best done on top of powerpc-next and I can cope with the
> > conflicts one more time.  
> 
> But I don't want to send that many conflicts to Linus.
> 
> What we need to do is generate the patch just after 4.11-rc1 is out,
> that way there should be zero skew between my fixes/next and Linus'
> tree. I've been meaning to do it for a few releases but just never
> remember.
> 
> So Andrew if you can remember to do it then that would be awesome :)
> 
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> index 689cf9218b21..570195c8a86a 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> >> @@ -80,91 +80,91 @@ config ARCH_HAS_DMA_SET_COHERENT_MASK
> >>  config PPC  
> >
> > Could we add a comment just above asking that the selects be kept in order?  
> 
> Actually at the bottom would make more sense I think, that's where
> people will try to add new ones.

Sure, both good ideas.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell