> -----Original Message----- > From: Holger Brunck [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 03 July 2012 18:02 > To: Prafulla Wadaskar > Cc: [email protected]; Valentin Longchamp; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un target to > km_kirkwood > > On 07/03/2012 01:19 PM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Holger Brunck [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: 03 July 2012 16:08 > >> To: Prafulla Wadaskar > >> Cc: [email protected]; Valentin Longchamp > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un target to > >> km_kirkwood > >> > >> Hi Prafulla, > >> > >> On 07/03/2012 10:05 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Holger Brunck [mailto:[email protected]] > >>>> Sent: 13 June 2012 19:03 > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Cc: Holger Brunck; Valentin Longchamp; Prafulla Wadaskar > >>>> Subject: [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un target to > >>>> km_kirkwood > >>>> > >>>> Use the generic header km_kirkwood.h and get rid of the > >>>> board specific header. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Holger Brunck <[email protected]> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp > <[email protected]> > >>>> cc: Prafulla Wadaskar <[email protected]> > >>>> --- > >>>> changes for v2: > >>>> - rebased because of changes in other patches > >>>> > >>>> board/keymile/km_arm/km_arm.c | 9 ++-- > >>>> boards.cfg | 2 +- > >>>> include/configs/km_kirkwood.h | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> include/configs/mgcoge3un.h | 87 --------------------------- > -- > >> --- > >>>> --------- > >>>> 4 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-) > >>>> delete mode 100644 include/configs/mgcoge3un.h > >>> > >>> This patch makes sense to me since it since it shrinks overall > code. > >>> Doe not have dependency in patch series, can be accepted if > outside > >> the series. > >>> > >> > >> again, but there are a lot of dependencies between 01-02 and 03-04 > >> because all > >> doing a lot in km_kirkwood.h. So do you have any particular > >> objections against > >> the first two patches, beside your input for the kwbimage.cfg which > I > >> answered > >> in a different mail? > > > > As I suggested earlier > > > > You may have patch series for the bugfixes/improvements to the > currently supported code. > > > > You may have new board support as separate patch, if those have > dependency, get it addressed first. > > > > As such I do not have any objection about longer patch series but > > Generally having a long patch series requires longer time to be get > pulled in. > > > > so and when do you think to pull this in? AFAIK we are shortly before > rc1. And I > would like to see this in, everything was published before the merge > window was > closed and we have reacted on every input you gave. But we can't react > on inputs > which are not clearly stated. > > So how do we proceed here to get this in for v2012.07? If I summarize > the > situation you don't have any particular objections against 01-08 of > this series. > So should I resend these eight patches as a standalone serie to get at > least > these patches in?
Yes, Please send the patch series for bug fix and improvements ONLY, I will pull them ASAP. The others we can converge soon. Regards... Prafulla . . . _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
