Thierry,
-----Original Message----- From: Thierry Reding [mailto:thierry.reding@avionic-design.de] Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 11:09 PM To: Tom Warren Cc: Stephen Warren; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Simon Glass Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] tegra: Allow boards to perform early GPIO setup
PGP Signed by an unknown key
Tom Warren wrote:
Thierry,
-----Original Message----- From: Thierry Reding [mailto:thierry.reding@avionic-design.de] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:00 AM To: Stephen Warren Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Tom Warren; Simon Glass Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] tegra: Allow boards to perform early GPIO setup
Old Signed by an unknown key
- Thierry Reding wrote:
Furthermore I'll need to rebase the patches onto the Tegra branch due to the major restructuring of the configuration files.
This isn't true. But I'll still have to respin because of the MAINTAINERS entry and the other points that you brought up, so let me know if I should add a patch for Seaboard.
When you respin this, make sure to base it on current u-boot-tegra/master, and change any CONFIG_TEGRA2_MMC or _SPI references to CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC & _SPI (see my changes to rename tegra periph drivers for the upcoming Tegra3 rearch).
I saw that you already carry a patch in your next branch that does the renames in the tec.h configuration. Can I assume that when I respin with those changes included in the patch that introduces TEC support you'll drop that hunk from your patch? Or should I rather follow up with patches based on your next branch?
Of course, I'd like to minimize my churn in /next as much as possible, but I can work with whatever you come up with in your revised patchset.
Thanks,
Tom
Thierry
- Unknown Key
- 0xA2E3269F