Dear Wolfgang, On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote: > Dear Tomas Hlavacek, > > In message <1351876722-5183-1-git-send-email-tmshl...@gmail.com> you wrote: >> This patchset is a first stage of preparation of the net subsystem >> for the driver model. >> >> The idea of this patchset is: >> 1) Remove ops .init, .send, .recv and .halt from the eth_device struct. >> Add a sparate structure eth_ops which is ready for inclusion >> to DM core. >> 2) Replace dynamic init of ops function pointers by static struct. >> 3) Do minor style cleanup. >> >> Tomas Hlavacek (50): >> net: dm: Pull out ops from struct eth_device >> net: 4xx_enet: Pull out init of struct eth_ops >> net: altera_tse: Pull out init of struct eth_ops >> net: dm9000x: Pull out init of struct eth_ops >> net: armada100_fec: Pull out init of struct eth_ops > > Hm... looking at this patch series, I wonder if it is really > bisectable? Can I really apply any number of these patches (the first > N, with N < 50) and expect the code to build and to work?
It should be, because the first patch adds new struct eth_ops and changes all accesses to its' members in one step. Patches 2 .. 50 remove dynamic ops settings and add static initialization to each affected driver - one patch per driver. I would rather try that by compiling U-Boot with only 1/50 applied and after some random N, say 30/50 to be absolutely sure. Let me get back later when I have my MAKEALL results. Tomas _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot