Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH

2013-09-27 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 26.09.2013 18:06, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: > Richard Weinberger wrote: >> And, of course, this makes your patch valid. >> Can you also please ensure that your new defconfigs are minimal? > > Yeah, it's close to a minimal configuration for the 3.10 kernel > (latest at the time of patch subm

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 1/8] um: Create defconfigs for i386 and x86_64

2013-09-27 Thread Toralf Förster
On 09/26/2013 12:35 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 26.09.2013 12:20, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: >> Richard Weinberger wrote: >>> This patch is based on: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/4/396 >>> >>> Cc: Ramkumar Ramachandra >>> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger >>> --- >>> arch/um/configs/i3

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 1/8] um: Create defconfigs for i386 and x86_64

2013-09-27 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am 27.09.2013 11:22, schrieb Toralf Förster: > On 09/26/2013 12:35 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am 26.09.2013 12:20, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: >>> Richard Weinberger wrote: This patch is based on: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/4/396 Cc: Ramkumar Ramachandra Signed-off-by

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH

2013-09-27 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Richard Weinberger wrote: > And, of course, this makes your patch valid. > Can you also please ensure that your new defconfigs are minimal? Yeah, it's close to a minimal configuration for the 3.10 kernel (latest at the time of patch submission). I was aiming to minimize the diff between the curren