From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756548Ab0LINwV (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 08:52:21 -0500 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:34867 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753527Ab0LINwT (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 08:52:19 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 14:49:30 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Tejun Heo cc: Guan Xuetao , Arnd Bergmann , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv1 000/211] unicore32 architecture support In-Reply-To: <4D00A672.9050906@kernel.org> Message-ID: References: <01ca01cb9783$7818c3f0$684a4bd0$@mprc.pku.edu.cn> <4D00A672.9050906@kernel.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org B1;2401;0cOn Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On 12/09/2010 10:28 AM, Guan Xuetao wrote: > > From: Guan Xuetao > > > > These patches add support for UniCore-32 ISA in linux kernel. > > UniCore ISA is defined and developed by Micro-Processor R&D Center of > > Peking University, and over the years, the CPUs and SoCs using UniCore ISA > > have been successfully applied in a variety of products in China. > > * Patches should be split according to logical steps of changes, not > per-file. > > * Patches should be bisectable. IOW, after applying upto any patch in > the series, the tree should be buildable and working. That does not work for a new architecture. There is nothing to bisect. > * When posting a patch series, especially one as large as 211, please > make the mails for the actual patches replies to the head message. > Don't post it as 212 separate messages or replies to the immediate > previous patch. > > So, in short, if you're adding a whole new arch, just post it as a > single patch or a series of several patches if it requires changes > outside of the specific arch subtree. Crap. a single patch is a major PITA for review. It's even worse than 211 per file patches. It's ok to have several patches ordered by topics - generic header stuff - processor and system headers - low level entry and setup code - process/thread related code - mm related code - timers - interrupts - ptrace - signals - fault handling - misc - build system, main makefile, Kconfig That makes it actually feasible to review. Thanks, tglx