From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757019Ab1GDPSJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:18:09 -0400 Received: from newsmtp5.atmel.com ([204.2.163.5]:22244 "EHLO sjogate2.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756451Ab1GDPSF (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:18:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4E11D99D.7040005@atmel.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 17:17:49 +0200 From: Nicolas Ferre Organization: atmel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arnd Bergmann CC: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, patrice.vilchez@atmel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH for 3.0] AT91: Change nand buswidth logic to match hardware default configuration References: <1309515924-22531-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> <201107041625.25972.arnd@arndb.de> <4E11D123.9070409@atmel.com> <201107041713.23982.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <201107041713.23982.arnd@arndb.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Le 04/07/2011 17:13, Arnd Bergmann : > On Monday 04 July 2011, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >>> In this case, studying the patch more closely shows that it's >>> very harmless, but I'd rather not have to look that closely. >> >> Well, in fact it is a fix against what was introduced in a 3.0 patch >> which I found to be wrong. >> The reason because I do not want to be in next kernel is the fact that >> it can puzzle the user (people that want to use kernel without changing >> the system_rev between 2.6.39 -> 3.0 and again revert their changes for >> 3.0 -> 3.1). >> >>> Am I correct that the bug is a regression against 2.6.39? >> >> No, in fact it was introduced during 3.0 early -rc. > > That's what I mean by 'regression against 2.6.39': it was working in 2.6.39, > but later kernels are broken without this fix. Absolutely (here broken = not easily understandable by user). Bye, -- Nicolas Ferre