On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 08:58:56AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 03:10:56PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 02:34:46PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:40:22AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > Hi Vinod, > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:51:19PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 02:11:11PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > > > This reverts commit 48a9db462d99494583dad829969616ac90a8df4e. > > > > > > > > > > > > Some platforms actually need support for the memset operations. Bring it back. > > > > > > > > > > Bringing memset is fine, but i think you need to remove the > > > > > CONFIG_ASYNC_MEMSET parts, i dont see why we need them and not get rid of > > > > > async and add clean memset support. > > > > > > > > Yeah, I removed most of it already, but that part slipped through. > > > > > > > > There used to be a few drivers defining the memset operations. Do you > > > > want to restore these as well or should we expect people to > > > > reintroduce them later if needed? > > > > > > Reintroduce afetr testing would be better.. > > > > Except that I don't have access to any of these platforms but the > > marvell one, so that might be tricky to test. > > well yes you cna test and submit only the ones you have, for rest > folks who care about those driver should submit Ok, perfect. Let's do it like that then. Thanks! Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
