| Message ID | 20111122234933.GA28400@thor.bakeyournoodle.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> Acked-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> Ben, I don't have anything particularly urgent for 3.2 and this seems like it is well within the 3.2 window (defconfig updates usually come later). Want to pick this up yourself, or do you want me to prep a tree somewhere? josh
On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 20:04 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> > > Acked-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> > > Ben, I don't have anything particularly urgent for 3.2 and this seems > like it is well within the 3.2 window (defconfig updates usually come > later). Want to pick this up yourself, or do you want me to prep a > tree somewhere? I'm working on 3.3 right now, so I'd rather you throw this in there, I doesn't seem to be particularily urgent for 3.2 is it? (who actually uses 4xx_defconfig ?) Cheers, Ben.
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:34:44PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 20:04 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> > > > > Acked-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> > > > > Ben, I don't have anything particularly urgent for 3.2 and this seems > > like it is well within the 3.2 window (defconfig updates usually come > > later). Want to pick this up yourself, or do you want me to prep a > > tree somewhere? > > I'm working on 3.3 right now, so I'd rather you throw this in there, I > doesn't seem to be particularily urgent for 3.2 is it? (who actually > uses 4xx_defconfig ?) It's mostly for linux-next / kisskb There was a compiler error added to ndfc in upstream[1]. The change was in linux-next but nothing currently builds that code. If we update 4xx_defconfig then linux-next will catch errors sooner. So it's not urgent, but it doesn't hurt [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/127000/ Yours Tony
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 20:04 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote: >> > Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> >> >> Acked-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> >> >> Ben, I don't have anything particularly urgent for 3.2 and this seems >> like it is well within the 3.2 window (defconfig updates usually come >> later). Want to pick this up yourself, or do you want me to prep a >> tree somewhere? > > I'm working on 3.3 right now, so I'd rather you throw this in there, I > doesn't seem to be particularily urgent for 3.2 is it? (who actually Urgent, no. I'll get a tree going after the holidays. > uses 4xx_defconfig ?) The linux-next tree builds it. It would have caught a compile error in the NDFC driver much earlier if we had it enabled in the defconfig. josh
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/configs/ppc44x_defconfig b/arch/powerpc/configs/ppc44x_defconfig index 6cdf1c0..3b98d73 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/configs/ppc44x_defconfig +++ b/arch/powerpc/configs/ppc44x_defconfig @@ -52,6 +52,8 @@ CONFIG_MTD_CFI=y CONFIG_MTD_JEDECPROBE=y CONFIG_MTD_CFI_AMDSTD=y CONFIG_MTD_PHYSMAP_OF=y +CONFIG_MTD_NAND=m +CONFIG_MTD_NAND_NDFC=m CONFIG_MTD_UBI=m CONFIG_MTD_UBI_GLUEBI=m CONFIG_PROC_DEVICETREE=y
Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> --- Again appologies for the SPAM trying to send this message. arch/powerpc/configs/ppc44x_defconfig | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)