[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <7c6dc57c-f33b-4a4b-9423-01ee2933f759@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 18:35:42 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Patrice Chotard" <patrice.chotard@...s.st.com>,
"Olof Johansson" <olof@...om.net>,
"Alexandre Torgue" <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
"Russell King" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"Maxime Coquelin" <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
"Petr Mladek" <pmladek@...e.com>, "Yoann Congal" <yoann.congal@...le.fr>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, soc@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] ARM: config: stm32: Disable useless flags
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024, at 18:29, patrice.chotard@...s.st.com wrote:
> From: Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...s.st.com>
>
> *** BLURB HERE ***
>
> Patrice Chotard (7):
> ARM: configs: stm32: run savedefconfig for STM32 defconfig
> ARM: configs: stm32: Disable CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_STM32MP in STM32
> defconfig
> ARM: configs: stm32: Disable CONFIG_SUSPEND in STM32 defconfig
> ARM: configs: stm32: Disable CONFIG_ADVISE_SYSCALLS in STM32 defconfig
I would structure these the other way round: you can combine patches
2-7 and just explain why you do those changes in one commit.
For the things that have changed by themselves, you do need a lot
more explanation, so we can see that you have checked that these
don't accidentally break stuff. You can probably still do them
in a single patch, but it would be nicer to have one patch
per option that has become unavailable, changing all defconfig
files that need the same change.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists