From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:56:34 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v9 15/30] autoconfig.mk: Make it possible to define configs from other configs In-Reply-To: <1238808294.475071.1363181749660.JavaMail.root@advansee.com> References: <1362596377-5827-1-git-send-email-benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com> <201303080429.00780.marex@denx.de> <20130308052519.190E4200643@gemini.denx.de> <201303081508.49239.marex@denx.de> <20130308142820.DC95120145C@gemini.denx.de> <5139F87A.7000808@ti.com> <5140326B.6000907@denx.de> <1238808294.475071.1363181749660.JavaMail.root@advansee.com> Message-ID: <51408592.7050701@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/13/2013 09:35 AM, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 9:01:47 AM, Stefano Babic wrote: >> On 08/03/2013 15:54, Fabio Estevam wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Tom Rini >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think the giant list from Benoit got lost. It's a HUGE >>>> thing to change. I think we should just accept that config >>>> variables are mixed case, or at least not block this patch on >>>> a very large unrelated fixup. >>> >>> Agreed. Benoit's patch series contains 30 patches and it is at >>> version 9. >>> >>> It would be better to treat this fixup seperately. >>> >> >> Agree with you, this is my proposal to go on. I think we can also >> try to split patches for area of competence, with patchsets for >> i.MX, for ARM and for general. And maybe merging patches that are >> laready passed the review. >> >> For that, patches 1 until 9 are related to i.MX and mainly to the >> NAND for i.MX. They get already Scott's ACK. IMHO they are >> independent from the rest of the patchset and they can be merged >> now. My proposal is that I merge this part and for the next >> iteration the number of patches will be reduced ;-) >> >>> Currently mx31pdk is broken in mainline and Benoit's series >>> fixes it, so hopefully this can make into 2013.04. >> >> Let's see what we can do ;-) > > Yes, it could be split as you suggest, but it has already been > reviewed and tested by several people, so I'm not sure if we still > have to wait for anything before applying. Albert seemed to agree > for this v9 for the arm bits, but he has not given his formal ack > yet. Albert, is everything OK for you? > > The sooner it is applied, the longer people will have to test > before the release. I am not going to insist that the N different parts come in from N different trees, as long as the relevant acks are present (and it sounds like they are). I will give the whole series another read today just to be sure there's nothing popping out at me. - -- Tom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRQIWRAAoJENk4IS6UOR1WLToQAJzQlTf1c6XogQZq6YaCENAC 1cSyfAnD/+1FDtoEt1wxfSxDi77mgIifsig+ac6ZbtJAB9y1AsKudTOyJEI5TBgu 85FpSx4re7DLUqHaOgVV35bHNRLwfTM1vaxb4KJcfFqUGnIiVTpyerScPnFUDNpU gz0LZh5ou4saK89oOWA3qbIHeADDNU/st0C05HjObkotCcPDOK0zPoAmc4T4WC03 lfUb23HYQh9OKK75MdW+UYOgNRIl9R0pqFNklujof5m2t5NrSJhp8xlfVZgUw571 G/Yn69n+VDmDrSrDorFL4dpvRZE69x+M07k7hYGg0R5ZKQcgZ/2iwCADMCnvshZa t9V/ttPvOfTXCaEHi/gCe7u+CBjCu0FW7R9/2LWFImOw5qnYqR/D/Scf4WOgTaMi xTksob1+rLJJ6dIzo/BFc0LlOpaKJTLmrpMiBwJmvPh9I2/wYUsbGRCS8nhFIfSf o5GklP8CfiRKaIssS692ncxdGy7ZTFQo3txLSC+H8Kyjy72Kd6XwBBd7E7w4jhDh iBxoDVgelwSLjjAV8zuRBSWO8ueGPe5qAicNfhoRhsJ/hUtwxMG1cO2kjFAhVsOC ZtP56RvajKZBSnUk607iajZxuYcElTxKg8lL8PlugHemsTDBxZeiR/BQtmbqpzDs rgtpehR2zx9Cx3SM8nnN =xRZz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----