[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un target to km_kirkwood

Prafulla Wadaskar
2012-07-05T12:09:17Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Holger Brunck [mailto:holger.brunck at keymile.com]
> Sent: 05 July 2012 12:46
> To: Prafulla Wadaskar
> Cc: Wolfgang Denk; u-boot at lists.denx.de; Valentin Longchamp
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un
> target to km_kirkwood
...snip...
> >
> > Dear Holger
> >
> > To avoid any further confusion let's keep aside all the past.
> > 1. Pls post the new patch series that is just targeted for bugfixes
> and updates (no addition of new boards or drivers)
>
> Ok so there are again no inputs to specific patches and no change
> request for a
> specific patch (beside the input to the managed switch). What you do
> is to
> rephrase a requirement for patch series in general. So there seems to
> be a rule
> that if you a) add new boards and b) cleanup and maintain existing
> boards in the
> same patch serie the patches needs to be in a special order. Please
> show me the
> pointer in u-boot guidlines to this if there is one. I know that such
> tasks
> should be seperated into different patches what this serie defenitely
> does. If
> not please discuss this as a new requirement with other custodians as
> Wolfgang
> suggested in the same thread. I don't think that such a requirement
> would be a
> benefit for board maintainers and custodians, because code maintaining
> and
> improvement is always a good thing. Your requirement in practice would
> mean,
> stop code maintaining for board series during the time you need to add
> new boards.

Dear Holger,

I think custodian should pull entire patch series if all the patches in the series are ACKED.
If any patch within patch series is NACKED, the patch series does not stand valid to pull.
Someone may correct me if I am wrong.

>
> > 2. You may post anther patch series for addition of new boards which
> does not have any dependencies (if you have such)
> > 3. You may post a standalone patch for a switch driver, needed ack
> from Joe, that might go to u-boot-net.git
>
> Ok we can remove this very limited driver from the patch serie.
>
> So what we can do is providing a patch serie where the driver for this
> managed
> switch is not in. But as far as I understood this does not be in
> accordance what
> you requested?

Ideally, the answer is same as above. There will be no issues if all patches in the patch series are ACKED.

I always love smaller patch series specific to the objective.

Regards...
Prafulla . . .