Hi Michael, On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:56:12 +1100 Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > > Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> writes: > > On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:30:02 +1100 Andrew Donnellan > > <andrew.donnel...@au1.ibm.com> wrote: > >> > >> config PPC has a lot of selects under it. They're not sorted in any > >> particular order, leading to merge conflicts when adding items at the end. > >> > >> Sort them alphabetically. > > > > Excellent, thanks. > > > >> Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> > >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnel...@au1.ibm.com> > >> --- > >> > >> On top of linux-next 20170130 > > > > Probably best done on top of powerpc-next and I can cope with the > > conflicts one more time. > > But I don't want to send that many conflicts to Linus. > > What we need to do is generate the patch just after 4.11-rc1 is out, > that way there should be zero skew between my fixes/next and Linus' > tree. I've been meaning to do it for a few releases but just never > remember. > > So Andrew if you can remember to do it then that would be awesome :) > > >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig > >> index 689cf9218b21..570195c8a86a 100644 > >> --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig > >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig > >> @@ -80,91 +80,91 @@ config ARCH_HAS_DMA_SET_COHERENT_MASK > >> config PPC > > > > Could we add a comment just above asking that the selects be kept in order? > > > > Actually at the bottom would make more sense I think, that's where > people will try to add new ones.
Sure, both good ideas. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
