On 14:11 Fri 23 Oct     , Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 05:19:17PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

quoted

On 10:58 Wed 21 Oct     , Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:

quoted

CONFIG_MACH_ECO920 is enabled in at91rm9200dk_defconfig.  The name is
wrong, but this is better than adding another defconfig or don't get
compile coverage at all./

in this case it will be better to have a generic rm9200 defconfig

right, but imho this shouldn't stop my patch.

rename at91rm9200dk_defconfig to at91rm9200_defconfig will make the patch
better and will avoid this comment about wrong name defconfig

Best Regards,
J.