On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 08:29:16PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Dear Tom, > > in message <20030711155226.GV17433 at ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> you wrote: > > > > No, but I do wonder if you ever plan on sending anything out again. It > > Has anything significantly changed? Patches/extensions are still > accepted for 2.5 only, right? Does this tree work for 8xx systems?
2.5 untested, so that when 2.6 rolls around there is less pain for all, and 2.4 tested. This hasn't changed, and is becoming a bit more of a trend even outside of the PPC world. It's not even that hard to test now, doing 'make ARCH=ppc CROSS_COMPILE=foo arch/ppc/foo/bar.o' will work and is a feature of the new build system. > > IIRC the last time we such discussions simply nothing happened: see > for example to code for dp_alloc / dp_free that was submitted several > times. google knows nothing of this, can you give a pointer into the thread please? Thanks. > Or see thread "set_rtc_time() cleanup / normalization" in May > this year. I just re-read most of it, and Gabriel Paubert, who wrote most / all of that code, and is the 'maintainer' of sorts objected, a few solutions to make everyone happy were proposed (ppc_md hook or similar, I believe) and no further patch was submitted. > If you suggest there is a way to get patches really included into the > "official" trees, please let me know how to do this. As always, send things in functional hunks. If for example, the 8xx / 8260 enet and serial drivers (Of note: the 4xx enet driver now falls into this catagory) in 2.6 get moved into drivers/serial (And rewritten) and drivers/net (cleaned up?), rmk (serial maintainer) and Jeff Garzik (net driver maintainer) aren't going to take a large patch without at least as much griping as I've made in the past, if not more. And when someone comments on the reasoning, logic, or suggests an alternate way of doing things for people which need the current behavior / whatever, re-spin the patch. All of the patches you've submitted to me like this, AFAIK, have either been accepted, or I've told you I cannot take that patch, it needs to be sent elsewhere. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
