From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753150AbcBKDXD (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 22:23:03 -0500 Received: from host.buserror.net ([209.198.135.123]:41044 "EHLO host.buserror.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753084AbcBKDWo (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 22:22:44 -0500 Message-ID: <1455160957.2463.14.camel@buserror.net> From: Scott Wood To: Alessio Igor Bogani , Kumar Gala Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:22:37 -0600 In-Reply-To: <1455096160-5868-1-git-send-email-alessio.bogani@elettra.eu> References: <1455096160-5868-1-git-send-email-alessio.bogani@elettra.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.16.5-1ubuntu3.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 75.72.173.242 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: oss@buserror.net X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * -15 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] Subject: Re: powerpc/86xx: Use config fragments approach X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on host.buserror.net) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 10:22 +0100, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote: > Signed-off-by: Alessio Igor Bogani > --- > arch/powerpc/Makefile | 10 + > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-32bit.config | 4 + > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-hw.config | 106 +++++++++ > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-smp.config | 2 + > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/gef_ppc9a_defconfig | 216 ------------------ > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/gef_sbc310_defconfig | 214 ------------------ > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/gef_sbc610_defconfig | 273 -------------------- > --- > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/mpc8610_hpcd_defconfig | 110 --------- > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/mpc8641_hpcn_defconfig | 156 ------------- > arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/sbc8641d_defconfig | 246 -------------------- > arch/powerpc/configs/mpc86xx_basic_defconfig | 6 + > arch/powerpc/configs/mpc86xx_defconfig | 162 -------------- > 12 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 1377 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-32bit.config > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-hw.config > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-smp.config > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/gef_ppc9a_defconfig > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/gef_sbc310_defconfig > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/gef_sbc610_defconfig > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/mpc8610_hpcd_defconfig > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/mpc8641_hpcn_defconfig > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/86xx/sbc8641d_defconfig > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/mpc86xx_basic_defconfig > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/configs/mpc86xx_defconfig Why do your patches not start with [PATCH]? How does the resulting config compare to the individual previous configs? Are there any options that were dropped from the union of the old configs? Mutually exclusive options that had to be resolved one way or another? Changes in non-hw options? It would be nice to do what I did with 85xx in commit 7e2ad2ef851, and start with a patch that makes the defconfigs conform to what the new approach will give (to more easily see what is changing), and then have the next patch switch to fragments. > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-32bit.config > b/arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-32bit.config > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..8a2c6ff > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/powerpc/configs/86xx-32bit.config > @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ > +CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y > +CONFIG_KEXEC=y > +CONFIG_PPC_86xx=y > +CONFIG_PROC_KCORE=y Why is this not in mpc86xx_basic_defconfig? There is no 64-bit 86xx. -Scott