On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 11:04:18AM -0600, Guzman Lugo, Fernando wrote: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 05:29:17PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> On Tuesday 09 November 2010, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> > Felipe Contreras (14): > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - update Kconfig to select IOMMU module" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - remove dmm custom module" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - deprecate reserve/unreserve_memory funtions" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - remove reserved memory clean up" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge: remove dw_dmmu_base from cfg_hostres struct" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - move all iommu related code to a new file" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - remove hw directory" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - fix mmufault support" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - remove custom mmu code from tiomap3430.c" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - rename bridge_brd_mem_map/unmap to a proper name" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge - move shared memory iommu maps to tiomap3430.c" > >> > Revert "staging: tidspbridge: replace iommu custom for opensource implementation" > >> > >> That adds quite a lot of crap back in that was removed by Fernando earlier: > >> > >> 44 files changed, 3733 insertions(+), 847 deletions(-) > >> > >> It may have been premature to merge the patches as you say, but now that > >> they are in, I'd vote for giving Fernando a chance to fix up any damage > >> that was done in the process rather than just reverting all the useful > >> changes. > > > > In looking at this further, I agree. > > > > Felipe, are all of these really needing to be reverted? How about > > picking out the functional changes that need to be resolved instead of > > just rolling back everything that has been done here. Surely not all of > > these are wrong, right? > > Patches are _NOT_ wrong, missing dependencies break the bridge. > Without that dependencies the first patch of the set won't work and > all other patches have dependency on the first one, so all of them > need to be reverted. How about hand-reverting only the wrong patch, so the other work isn't lost? I'd much prefer that. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
