On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 03:13:04PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 12:33 PM Daniel Walker [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 05:29:44PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 2:00 PM Daniel Walker [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 01:03:55PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:

quoted

Ok, so you agree we don't need to provide two CMDLINE, one to be appended and one to be prepended.

Let's only provide once CMDLINE as of today, and ask the user to select
whether he wants it appended or prepended or replacee. Then no need to
change all existing config to rename CONFIG_CMDLINE into either of the new
ones.

That's the main difference between my series and Daniel's series. So I'll
finish taking Will's comment into account and we'll send out a v3 soon.

It doesn't solve the needs of Cisco, I've stated many times your changes have
little value. Please stop submitting them.

Can you please outline what those needs are which aren't met?

append AND prepend at the same time on all architectures. Christophe doesn't
understand the need, and hence tries to minimize the feature set which is
incompatible with Cisco needs and all the other out of tree users.

Okay, but that's never been a feature in upstream. For upstream, we
refactor first and add features 2nd. In this case, the difference is
largely the kconfig and it would be better to not change the options
twice, but that's not a blocker for taking the refactoring. You won't
find a maintainer that's going to take adding a feature over cleanups
and unification.

It kind of is a feature in upstream, it's a matter of opinion. Some platform
used append and some use prepend, and it's likely because the maintainers needed
one or the other for development.

I'm not sure why you think I can't add the features in one go. It would be
horrid to take Christophe's changes, then have to do basically all the same work
a second time which is what Christophe's changes would force me to do.

Say for example I implement this change only on one architecture. In that case
the maintainer would be accepting a feature enhancement , but there would be no
stopping it. I shouldn't have to go two strokes on one architecture, but each
change I'm making is essentially a single architecture. They can go in all
together or one at a time.

Daniel