linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/22] ARM: ux500: Fork MSP platform registration for step-by-step DT enablement

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdZRJ1yX-o8-NUuMzXMz5ebbp=H21Xa6JMy1y56Chq-T9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:07:58 -0700
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	STEricsson_nomadik_linux@...t.st.com, linus.walleij@...ricsson.com,
	arnd@...db.de, broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/22] ARM: ux500: Fork MSP platform registration for
 step-by-step DT enablement

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 01:13:49PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> > We've done this before and it worked well last time. Here we're
>> > duplicating a complex registration function to ease the process
>> > of enabling it for Device Tree. As there are quite a few steps
>> > taken during the registration process, it makes sense to break
>> > them up into more manageable chunks. This patch will aid us.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
>>
>> I understand you have used this approach before so:
>> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>
> Does this comment take back your previous one:
>
> NOTE: it seems this patch set contains some churn. First you
> add in the forked device init, put in a big chunk of code and
> then in the *same* patch set delete it again. It's not like
> we're dying to see all the development history... can this
> be squashed down a bit?
>
> ... hence leave the patch-set as it is?

No. I just meant leave it like that for the devices outside of this
set.

If you're adding and then removing *all* of them in this set,
why add them in the first place?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/