On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 16:31 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 10:19 +0200, leroy christophe wrote: > > Le 25/03/2015 01:45, Scott Wood a écrit : > > > On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 10:34 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > >> You'll need to collect ACKs, or get the individual patches merged, and > > >> then we > > >> can take patch 8 through the powerpc tree once those are all in - > > >> probably for > > >> 4.2. > > > It looks like CONFIG_8xx is used a lot more than CONFIG_PPC_8xx, so it > > > would be less churn to get rid of the latter (plus, we also have > > > CONFIG_4xx, CONFIG_6xx, etc). The only use of PPC_8xx I see outside > > > arch/powerpc is in drivers/watchdog/Kconfig. > > > > Ok, we can do that. But when outside of arch/powerpc/, isn't is more > > explicit with CONFIG_PPC_8xx rather that CONFIG_8xx ? > > Yes, CONFIG_PPC_8xx is a better name, but churn and consistency matter > as well. > > > Now that I have submitted the first set of patch, don't we have a risk > > that now it is already merged by some other maintainers ? > > Sigh. I see a couple in linux-next.
Yeah, I think we missed the boat on that one. cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
