On 8/1/07, Paul Mundt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The generic code has a better chance of being merged if it actually works > at least and doesn't break every platform out there that has an existing > stub. It offers quite a bit of new functionality and does clean things up > a bit, so it would certainly be nice to get things to use that, rather > than having to duplicate all of this crap in the architectures. If it's > not going to be merged, everyone will of course continue using the > existing in-tree stubs (sh, ppc, etc.).
ok, ive opened a tracker on our site for this > It's generally advantageous to get these things working on your > architecture _before_ things are merged however, as it's one less thing > to catch up on after the fact. It also helps to figure out if there are > issues with the current implementation by trying it out on your platform > in advance, it's a lot more work to push back against it once it's > already merged. of course ... but if there isnt a serious chance of this being merged, then it isnt in our (Blackfin's) interest to investigate it since our current solution seems to be chugging alone fine -mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
