Re: [PATCH 0/3 v2] Remove need for include/asm-ppc
From: David Gibson <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-21 03:02:34
On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 09:47:30PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:47:07 +1000 David Gibson [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 10:44:31AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:quoted
Josh Boyer wrote:quoted
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 10:32:43 -0500 Kumar Gala [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Do we want to go and move stuff back out of arch/powerpc/kernel back into arch/ppc/kernel? or just include files?What would be the point of doing that? I would think we want the opposite, in that we want to reuse as much of arch/powerpc during arch/ppc compiles as possible. Sort of shows how much is "left" to port.The point would be to keep the two trees separate, so that one doesn't need to worry about breaking arch/ppc when making a change to arch/powerpc.Exactly so. Having to be careful about not breaking arch/ppc when doing cleanups for arch/powerpc is a pain in the bum.How many times has that happened recently? If it's fairly infrequent,
It's infrequent because I've shyed away from cleaning up shared files, precisely because I'm afraid of breaking arch/ppc.
then just do the split when you're doing the arch/powerpc cleanup. I'm still not convinced that doing a wholesale split again is worth the effort. But then again, I'm not opposed either. Particularly if someone else is doing the work :). It simply doesn't make tons of sense to my feeble little brain. Seems like that time could be spent better elsewhere. josh
-- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson