On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 20:31 +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Sergei Ianovich <ynvich@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Thanks for spotting this. This is caused by a change in the latest > > version of the patch (SERIAL_8250_PXA instead of SERIAL_PXA). This > > change could be reverted. > Actually I'm against the revert. > The name change looks very good to me, please keep it. Is it worth adding an error if CONFIG_SERIAL_PXA is defined? Or is there any other way of preventing this patch launching Linus' "flag days" as Russel King named it? I understand that people are afraid of taking this patch. If it starts causing troubles at runtime, it will be difficult to diagnose. There will be no console for most people. So it is probably good idea to fail at boot time. > > > But that can be handled in an subsequent patch to keep your acks > > > and > > > reviews. > > I will respin the patch. Please comment on the acks and reviews. > > They > > were made at an earlier version of the patch. That version no longer > > applies. Can the updated version carry on the flags? > I don't get you. If you mean keeping CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_PXA, then yes, > please > keep it. I mean should the patch be re-revied and re-acked? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
