From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 13:35:57 +0000 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Renesas ARM Based SoC Boards Cleanups Updates for v3.17 Message-Id: <20140720133549.GA31336@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <20140719185548.GC4265@quad.lixom.net> In-Reply-To: <20140719185548.GC4265@quad.lixom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:55:48AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 08:59:25AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > Hi Olof, Hi Kevin, Hi Arnd, > > > > Please consider these Renesas ARM based SoC Boards Cleanups updates for v3.17. > > > > This pull request is based on a merge of: > > > > * "Fourth Round of Renesas ARM Based SoC Defconfig Updates for v3.17", > > tagged as renesas-defconfig4-for-v3.17, > > which I have sent a pull request for. > > > > The reason for this dependency is to avoid attempts to use > > genmai_defconfig after the board code it relies on has been removed. > > I'd prefer not to add this dependency. It's not a big deal to have a defconfig > that won't build momentarily, it doesn't cause any real harm and I'd rather > avoid keeping this merge/dependency. Can you respin this? Thanks for the clarification, I'll respin this as you suggest. > > * "Renesas ARM Based SoC DT Timers Updates for v3.17", > > tagged as renesas-dt-timers-for-v3.17, > > which I have sent a pull request for. > > Hmm. You're doing cleanups on top of new development instead of the other way > around. Try to avoid that in future releases if you can. This relates to the order that the code was developed, although I agree it is not ideal with the benifit of 20/20 hind-sight. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: horms@verge.net.au (Simon Horman) Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 22:35:57 +0900 Subject: [GIT PULL] Renesas ARM Based SoC Boards Cleanups Updates for v3.17 In-Reply-To: <20140719185548.GC4265@quad.lixom.net> References: <20140719185548.GC4265@quad.lixom.net> Message-ID: <20140720133549.GA31336@verge.net.au> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:55:48AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 08:59:25AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > Hi Olof, Hi Kevin, Hi Arnd, > > > > Please consider these Renesas ARM based SoC Boards Cleanups updates for v3.17. > > > > This pull request is based on a merge of: > > > > * "Fourth Round of Renesas ARM Based SoC Defconfig Updates for v3.17", > > tagged as renesas-defconfig4-for-v3.17, > > which I have sent a pull request for. > > > > The reason for this dependency is to avoid attempts to use > > genmai_defconfig after the board code it relies on has been removed. > > I'd prefer not to add this dependency. It's not a big deal to have a defconfig > that won't build momentarily, it doesn't cause any real harm and I'd rather > avoid keeping this merge/dependency. Can you respin this? Thanks for the clarification, I'll respin this as you suggest. > > * "Renesas ARM Based SoC DT Timers Updates for v3.17", > > tagged as renesas-dt-timers-for-v3.17, > > which I have sent a pull request for. > > Hmm. You're doing cleanups on top of new development instead of the other way > around. Try to avoid that in future releases if you can. This relates to the order that the code was developed, although I agree it is not ideal with the benifit of 20/20 hind-sight.