On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:13:49PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> > We've done this before and it worked well last time. Here we're >> > duplicating a complex registration function to ease the process >> > of enabling it for Device Tree. As there are quite a few steps >> > taken during the registration process, it makes sense to break >> > them up into more manageable chunks. This patch will aid us. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> >> >> I understand you have used this approach before so: >> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> > > Does this comment take back your previous one: > > NOTE: it seems this patch set contains some churn. First you > add in the forked device init, put in a big chunk of code and > then in the *same* patch set delete it again. It's not like > we're dying to see all the development history... can this > be squashed down a bit? > > ... hence leave the patch-set as it is?
No. I just meant leave it like that for the devices outside of this set. If you're adding and then removing *all* of them in this set, why add them in the first place? Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
