On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 08:23:53AM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > > Le Wed, 25 Jan 2017 03:34:13 +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > Hypothetically it could be possible that a machine maintainer finds that > > after rebasing private changes on top of the latest Linux release, a board > > mach type is not recognized by the Linux kernel due to an expired and > > removed entry in mach-types, then s/he updates a record in Russell's DB > > to get the old machine type ID again. However a counterpart change in > > U-boot board config won't be synced automatically, and IMHO it should be > > stated that this problem is neglected, obviously because it causes > > maintenance burden for no gain. > > I suspect there's also a case where a custom (non-mainline) kernel is > used on a given board and expects a machine ID from U-Boot, but this > machine ID is not required to be in RMK's list. Ugly, but such things > happen. > > > That said, your change is good, it may produce a discontent in particular > > cases, but it won't be problematic to remove it by partial commit > > reverting and adding an explanatory comment into the code. > > Agreed.
Sigh, I guess we've got enough cases of this that I'll re-work things based on the full mach-types list instead. Thanks folks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
