From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert ARIBAUD Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 13:13:29 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/5] ARM: vexpress: create A9 specific board config In-Reply-To: <515D566C.1040301@linaro.org> References: <1364996676-25361-1-git-send-email-andre.przywara@linaro.org> <1364996676-25361-3-git-send-email-andre.przywara@linaro.org> <20130404120954.18d9e04a@lilith> <515D566C.1040301@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20130404131329.10aa0c6e@lilith> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Andre, On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 12:31:08 +0200, Andre Przywara wrote: > On 04/04/2013 12:09 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > > Hi Andre, > > > > On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 15:44:33 +0200, Andre Przywara > > wrote: > > > >> From: Ryan Harkin > >> > >> This patch creates a new config for the A9 quad core tile that includes the > >> generic config for the Versatile Express platform. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ryan Harkin > >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara > >> --- > >> MAINTAINERS | 2 +- > >> boards.cfg | 2 +- > >> include/configs/vexpress_ca9x4.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> include/configs/vexpress_common.h | 1 - > >> 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> create mode 100644 include/configs/vexpress_ca9x4.h > > > > Wait, so patch 1/5 renames ca9x4_ct_vxp as vexpress_common, then patch > > 2/5 renames vexpress_common as vexpress_ca9x4? If so then please make > > this a single patch without the intermediary/temporary step. > > But that would not mark the actual file copy (vexpress_common.h is > almost the same as vexpress_ca9x4.h) as such, right? > So you would end up with a completely new file (_common.h) and > a file with almost all content deleted (_ca9x4.h). The fact that the > code just moved wouldn't be obvious. > That would be extra pity with the nice -M move features in the previous > patch. Try -C too, for copies, and possibly --find-copies-harder. I don't see how eliminating the intermediate target naming would prevent git from detecting moves and copies; and it will simplify the changes undergone by non-header files such as baords.cfg and MAINTAINERS. > However I have no problems with merging these two, if you insist. I am fine with either of the two following solutions: a) If patch 1/5 commonalizes vexpress code, then it should not rename any target, and patch 2/5 should do the renaming. or b) if patch 1/5 commonalizes and renames the target, it should give it its final name and patch 2 should be merged in. > Regards, > Andre. Amicalement, -- Albert.