Re: [PATCH] Remove CONFIG_FORCE_INLINING from defconfigs
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 22:53 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:29:06PM -0800, Harvey Harrison wrote: > > Option has been removed as of: > > 185c045c245f46485ad8bbd8cc1100e986ff3f13 x86, core: remove > > CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING > >... > > I'm not a fan of patching defconfig's this way - this will only bring > tons of patch conflicts (consider what happens when anyone already has > a completely updated defconfig in his tree and your patch goes in first). > OK, I just figured it was my patch that went in removing it, so I should submit a full-removal for completeness. If it will just cause problems, no need for it to be applied. Harvey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Remove CONFIG_FORCE_INLINING from defconfigs
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:29:06PM -0800, Harvey Harrison wrote: > Option has been removed as of: > 185c045c245f46485ad8bbd8cc1100e986ff3f13 x86, core: remove > CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING >... I'm not a fan of patching defconfig's this way - this will only bring tons of patch conflicts (consider what happens when anyone already has a completely updated defconfig in his tree and your patch goes in first). What you do manually already happens automatically when a maintainer updates a defconfig. And for not regularly updated defconfigs one obsolete option more or less does not matter at all - even more since apart from a warning there's anyway no problem. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Remove CONFIG_FORCE_INLINING from defconfigs
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:29:06PM -0800, Harvey Harrison wrote: Option has been removed as of: 185c045c245f46485ad8bbd8cc1100e986ff3f13 x86, core: remove CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING ... I'm not a fan of patching defconfig's this way - this will only bring tons of patch conflicts (consider what happens when anyone already has a completely updated defconfig in his tree and your patch goes in first). What you do manually already happens automatically when a maintainer updates a defconfig. And for not regularly updated defconfigs one obsolete option more or less does not matter at all - even more since apart from a warning there's anyway no problem. cu Adrian -- Is there not promise of rain? Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. Only a promise, Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] Remove CONFIG_FORCE_INLINING from defconfigs
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 22:53 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 12:29:06PM -0800, Harvey Harrison wrote: Option has been removed as of: 185c045c245f46485ad8bbd8cc1100e986ff3f13 x86, core: remove CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING ... I'm not a fan of patching defconfig's this way - this will only bring tons of patch conflicts (consider what happens when anyone already has a completely updated defconfig in his tree and your patch goes in first). OK, I just figured it was my patch that went in removing it, so I should submit a full-removal for completeness. If it will just cause problems, no need for it to be applied. Harvey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
