Re: [PATCH] riscv: defconfig: run savedefconfig to reorder it

Palmer Dabbelt
2025-06-12T18:57:33Z

On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 06:12:09 PDT (-0700), Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
> On 6/12/25 11:32, Yixun Lan wrote:
>> Hi Alexandre,
>>
>> On 10:37 Thu 12 Jun , Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
>>> Hi Yixun,
>>>
>>> On 6/11/25 16:56, Yixun Lan wrote:
>>>> Changes to defconfig should be always updated via 'make
>>>> savedefconfig', run this command to make it aligned again.
>>>>
>>>> This will ease the effort of reviewing changes of defconfig
>>>> in the future.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yixun Lan <dlan@gentoo.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> Update PDMA config bring in unnecessary changes[1], let's fix
>>>> it by run savedefconfig first.
>>>
>>> It would be easier if this patch was part of the PDMA series since the
>>> last patch will depend on it: @Guodong can you integrate this patch to
>>> your next revision of your patchset?
>>>
>> I'd rather make this patch independent, as nothing strongly ralated with PDMA,
>> and it probably would take several rounds for PDMA patch to be settled down..

Ya, I agree.

>> Besides, there is no problem for PDMA patch to depend on this patch if
>> needed (easy to use b4 to handle this..)

Yep, something like "b4 shazam -lts --merge --merge-base 958097bdf88"
should do it on the merge side -- and maybe you don't even need the
merge base, if all the b4 send side stuff picks it up right.

>> The idea here is to get this patch merged as early as possible, as it's
>> quite straightforward, and other people may have similar problem instead
>> of PDMA here
>
>
> Ok makes sense, so let's Guodong deal with that then.

(for some reason this isn't showing up in patchwork)

I'm going to merge it as a single patch into for-next. It'll loop
through the tester, but things look in good shape so it shouldn't take
too long. This way there's a stable hash people can base stuff off,
rather than waiting for some other patch set.

>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>