From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754481AbXLJQHx (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:07:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751860AbXLJQHq (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:07:46 -0500 Received: from smtp-101-monday.nerim.net ([62.4.16.101]:60563 "EHLO kraid.nerim.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751658AbXLJQHp (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:07:45 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:07:43 +0100 From: Jean Delvare To: David Brownell Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel list , eric miao Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.24-rc4-mm 0/6] gpiolib updates Message-ID: <20071210170743.06dc896d@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <200712092034.59924.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200712092034.59924.david-b@pacbell.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.5 (GTK+ 2.10.6; x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi David, On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 20:34:59 -0800, David Brownell wrote: > I'm thinking there should be a non-functional change to > the gpiolib code: move it from lib to drivers/gpio. > > My question is whether that's better done by replacing > the current patches with one new patch, or by a patch > deleting the current lib/gpiolib.c and adding a new > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c ... I think the former would > make more sense to anyone looking at GIT history. If gpiolib isn't in git yet, then indeed updating the patch that creates it before it goes in git sounds more sensible. Let's not make the git history more complex than needed. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare