On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:11:36AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:53:28 +0200 > Andrea Parri <andrea.pa...@amarulasolutions.com> wrote: > > > > Now that I look a little closer, I think the real issue is that the > > > "features" documentation assumes that there's a Kconfig option for each, > > > but there isn't in this case. The lack of a Kconfig option does not, > > > this time around, imply that the feature has gone away. > > > > > > I think that I should probably revert this patch in the short term. > > > Longer-term, it would be good to have an alternative syntax for "variable > > > set in the arch headers" to describe situations like this. > > > > Both matters were discussed during v1: > > > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1522774551-9503-1-git-send-email-andrea.pa...@amarulasolutions.com > > > > ... (and the glory details are documented in features-refresh.sh ;-) ). > > So I'll admit to being confused, since I don't see discussion of the > actual topic at hand.
A couple of clicks on "next in thread" :-) https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=152284705204400&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=152294150600751&w=2 > > > As I suggested above, simply reverting this patch will leave this file, > > (and only this file!) out-of-date (and won't resolve the conflict with > > Laurent's patch ...). > > Reverting this patch retains the updates from earlier in the series, and > does indeed make the conflict go away, so I'm still confused. What am I > missing? The updates from earlier added "TODO" rows for nds32 and riscv, but missed the "TODO -> ok" update for riscv. Andrea > > Thanks, > > jon
