| Message ID | 1430075424-25975-6-git-send-email-crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:10:23PM -0700, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > This define is unused. Remove. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com> Hi, Any reason not to shift down the numbering? Otherwise the whole series looks good to me. Thanks, Edgar > --- > target-microblaze/cpu.h | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/target-microblaze/cpu.h b/target-microblaze/cpu.h > index f21da2f..6522af7 100644 > --- a/target-microblaze/cpu.h > +++ b/target-microblaze/cpu.h > @@ -36,7 +36,6 @@ typedef struct CPUMBState CPUMBState; > > #define ELF_MACHINE EM_MICROBLAZE > > -#define EXCP_NMI 1 > #define EXCP_MMU 2 > #define EXCP_IRQ 3 > #define EXCP_BREAK 4 > -- > 1.9.1 > >
27.04.2015 12:28, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:10:23PM -0700, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: >> This define is unused. Remove. >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com> > > Hi, > > Any reason not to shift down the numbering? > > Otherwise the whole series looks good to me. What does this mean, "looks good", is it your R-b? :) >> @@ -36,7 +36,6 @@ typedef struct CPUMBState CPUMBState; >> >> #define ELF_MACHINE EM_MICROBLAZE >> >> -#define EXCP_NMI 1 >> #define EXCP_MMU 2 >> #define EXCP_IRQ 3 >> #define EXCP_BREAK 4 I can renumber this on commit just fine, there's no need to resend whole thing, is it okay with you Peter? Thanks, /mjt
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> wrote: > 27.04.2015 12:28, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:10:23PM -0700, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: >>> This define is unused. Remove. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com> >> >> Hi, >> >> Any reason not to shift down the numbering? None. Although my goal was to make no code change in the trivial patch series. >> >> Otherwise the whole series looks good to me. > > What does this mean, "looks good", is it your R-b? :) > >>> @@ -36,7 +36,6 @@ typedef struct CPUMBState CPUMBState; >>> >>> #define ELF_MACHINE EM_MICROBLAZE >>> >>> -#define EXCP_NMI 1 >>> #define EXCP_MMU 2 >>> #define EXCP_IRQ 3 >>> #define EXCP_BREAK 4 > > I can renumber this on commit just fine, there's no need > to resend whole thing, is it okay with you Peter? > It's ok with me. Thanks. Regards, Peter > Thanks, > > /mjt >
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 04:41:13PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: > 27.04.2015 12:28, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:10:23PM -0700, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > >> This define is unused. Remove. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com> > > > > Hi, > > > > Any reason not to shift down the numbering? > > > > Otherwise the whole series looks good to me. > > What does this mean, "looks good", is it your R-b? :) Sure, with the change: Reviewed-by: Edgar E. Iglesias <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com> > > >> @@ -36,7 +36,6 @@ typedef struct CPUMBState CPUMBState; > >> > >> #define ELF_MACHINE EM_MICROBLAZE > >> > >> -#define EXCP_NMI 1 > >> #define EXCP_MMU 2 > >> #define EXCP_IRQ 3 > >> #define EXCP_BREAK 4 > > I can renumber this on commit just fine, there's no need > to resend whole thing, is it okay with you Peter? > > Thanks, > > /mjt
diff --git a/target-microblaze/cpu.h b/target-microblaze/cpu.h index f21da2f..6522af7 100644 --- a/target-microblaze/cpu.h +++ b/target-microblaze/cpu.h @@ -36,7 +36,6 @@ typedef struct CPUMBState CPUMBState; #define ELF_MACHINE EM_MICROBLAZE -#define EXCP_NMI 1 #define EXCP_MMU 2 #define EXCP_IRQ 3 #define EXCP_BREAK 4
This define is unused. Remove. Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com> --- target-microblaze/cpu.h | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)