From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Detlev Zundel Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 13:52:10 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC] [PATCH 00/39] Rework of the debug() macro In-Reply-To: <201110241216.43763.marek.vasut@gmail.com> (Marek Vasut's message of "Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:16:43 +0200") References: <1319242654-15534-1-git-send-email-marek.vasut@gmail.com> <201110230017.34182.marek.vasut@gmail.com> <201110241216.43763.marek.vasut@gmail.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Marek, [...] > I certainly see your point. Btw. do you feel like help reviewing the PPC portion > of the patches? That'd be greatly appreciated as I'm not a PPC expert. I wanted > to avoid resubmission, so I only pushed the new set to git://git.denx.de/u-boot- > marex.git / debug branch. There is over 50 patches now. I fear that we have the possibility to loose efforts in communicating our distrubuted efforts here. If want to ack only a subset of the patches only available on a git tree, I don't know how to give my "Acked-By" through the patchwork magic and _not_ add even more work on your shoulders. On the other hand, the majority of fixes are printf fixes, so if the compiler does not complain on a MAKEALL any more, I don't see what other aspect I can evaluate on a "dry review". Effectively I was hoping that your large patch set stabilizes and produces no more warnings on a MAKEALL - in this case you have my Acked-by: Detlev Zundel Let me know if you have any better ideas... Cheers Detlev -- Referee's report: This paper contains much that is new and much that is true. Unfortunately, that which is true is not new and that which is new is not true. -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: dzu at denx.de