On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:33:37AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> As far as I remember, Daniel's proposal had some weaknesses that were
> never addressed. At that time I proposed an alternative series that was
> addressing most weaknesses, and my series was considered more mature
> that Daniel
Hi Pratyush,
Le 17/10/2023 à 12:40, Pratyush Brahma a écrit :
> Hi Daniel
>
> We have a usecase which requires this patch necessarily. For android
> usecases, we have two different build variants
> differentiated by defconfigs - production and debug. However, we only
> have a single dts for both
On 17-10-2023 19:51, Daniel Walker (danielwa) wrote:
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 04:10:42PM +0530, Pratyush Brahma wrote:
For such a usecase, the CONFIG_CMDLINE_PREPEND seems to be quite useful as
it would help to stitch bootloader
and the desired build variant's configs together. Can you please h
Hi Daniel
We have a usecase which requires this patch necessarily. For android
usecases, we have two different build variants
differentiated by defconfigs - production and debug. However, we only
have a single dts for both these variants.
We want to enable certain features like page owner an
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 04:10:42PM +0530, Pratyush Brahma wrote:
> For such a usecase, the CONFIG_CMDLINE_PREPEND seems to be quite useful as
> it would help to stitch bootloader
> and the desired build variant's configs together. Can you please help to
> merge this patch?
Yes, your at least the s
This seems quite useful. Can you please merge it?
On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 06:18:18PM +0200, Tomas Mudrunka wrote:
> This seems quite useful. Can you please merge it?
I need to re-send it before it can be merge. I'll try to update it soon.
Daniel
On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 11:32:01 -0800 Daniel Gimpelevich
wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 15:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:13:08 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:14:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > The patches (or some version of them) a
On Tue, 2021-02-16 at 18:42 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> I'd suggest also to find the good arguments to convince us that this
> series has a real added value, not just "cisco use it in its kernels
> so it is good".
Well, IIRC, this series was endorsed by the device tree maintainers as
the
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:32:01AM -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 15:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:13:08 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:14:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > The patches (or some version of the
Daniel Gimpelevich a écrit :
On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 15:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:13:08 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:14:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > The patches (or some version of them) are already in linux-next,
> > which messes m
On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 15:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:13:08 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:14:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > The patches (or some version of them) are already in linux-next,
> > > which messes me up. I'll disable them f
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:13:08 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> > The patches (or some version of them) are already in linux-next,
> > which messes me up. I'll disable them for now.
>
> Those are from my tree, but I remove them when you picked up the series. The
> next linux-next should not have the
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:14:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:23:28 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:53:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:24:45 -0700 Daniel Walker
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This code allows archi
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:23:28 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:53:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:24:45 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> >
> > > This code allows architectures to use a generic builtin command line.
> >
> > I wasn't cc'ed on [2/4].
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:53:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:24:45 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> > This code allows architectures to use a generic builtin command line.
>
> I wasn't cc'ed on [2/4]. No mailing lists were cc'ed on [0/4] but it
> didn't say anything use
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:24:45 -0700 Daniel Walker wrote:
> This code allows architectures to use a generic builtin command line.
I wasn't cc'ed on [2/4]. No mailing lists were cc'ed on [0/4] but it
didn't say anything useful anyway ;)
I'll queue them up for testing and shall await feedback from
This code allows architectures to use a generic builtin command line.
The state of the builtin command line options across architecture is
diverse. On x86 and mips they have pretty much the same code and the
code prepends the builtin command line onto the boot loader provided
one. On powerpc there
18 matches
Mail list logo
