In message 3F62CC58.8060604@elsoft.ch you wrote:

The attached patch fixes the following issues:

Makefile: add $(CC) to "-print-libgcc-filename" so compiler gets correct libgcc file

Description and patch disagree. In the patch, you add not "$(CC)" [which is already there - obviously], but "$(CFLAGS)".

What makes you think that options like "-Wall" or "-Wstrict-prototypes" would change the behaviour of "-print-libgcc-filename" ??

Rejected.

README: mention VCMA9 board

board/mpl/vcma9/* various changes to VCMA9 board specific files

Added.

common/cmd_nand.c prepare S3C2410 support (more to follow)

I think it's a bad idea to ``#include "../board/mpl/vcma9/vcma9.h"'' in a common source file. Either vcma9.h contains definitions valid and necessary for all S3C24xx boards, then those should be moved into to common header file; or they include board specific stuff, and then they should not be needed in common/cmd_nand.c

Rejected.

drivers/s3c24x0_i2c.c adjust delay value and some cleanup

Please explain why you think that this modification:

- i = I2C_TIMEOUT * 1000; + i = I2C_TIMEOUT * 10000; status = i2c->IICCON; while ((i > 0) && !(status & I2CCON_IRPND)) { - udelay(1000); + udelay(100); status = i2c->IICCON; i--; }

changes or improves the behaviour. I see no advantages.

Rejected for now. I see no advantages.

Rejected for now.

rtc/s3c24x0_rtc.c remove unnecessary enable/disable stuff and cleanup

Do you think the enable/disable stuff hurts? Left as is, rest applied.

Changes will show up on CVS "soon".

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk