Dear Paul Thomas,
In message you
wrote:
>
> > I have looked at about half of them.
> > It looks like partition tables are identical.
Right, and such duplication should be avoided.
> > I am interested in a way to generalize this file
> > and move it to the cpu layer so all the common
> > or nea
Paul Thomas wrote:
>> Another partition.c...
>> Looking for
>>
>> ugrep Ulf
>> ./board/ronetix/pm9263/partition.c
>> * Ulf Samuelsson
>> ./board/ronetix/pm9261/partition.c
>> * Ulf Samuelsson
>> ./board/atmel/at91sam9261ek/partition.c
>> * Ulf Samuelsson
>> ./board/atmel/at91sam9260ek/partiti
>
> Another partition.c...
> Looking for
>
> ugrep Ulf
> ./board/ronetix/pm9263/partition.c
> * Ulf Samuelsson
> ./board/ronetix/pm9261/partition.c
> * Ulf Samuelsson
> ./board/atmel/at91sam9261ek/partition.c
> * Ulf Samuelsson
> ./board/atmel/at91sam9260ek/partition.c
> * Ulf Samuelsson
>
Paul Thomas wrote:
> This adds CONFIG_AT91_ALT_EPINS to avoid using board configs in
> at91sam9260_devices.c.
> In adding this config at91sam9260ek.h afeb9260.h were changed, this should
> probabbly be tested for those 2 boards.
You are missing your signoff line.
You can do this by doing a 'git
This adds CONFIG_AT91_ALT_EPINS to avoid using board configs in
at91sam9260_devices.c.
In adding this config at91sam9260ek.h afeb9260.h were changed, this should
probabbly be tested for those 2 boards.
---
MAINTAINERS |4 +
MAKEALL
5 matches
Mail list logo