On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 9:04 PM, David Ahern <daah...@cisco.com> wrote: > > > On 01/14/11 13:57, Blue Swirl wrote: >>>> That's OK, but the correct fix is to change the design of the machine >>>> model to something more advanced where the unwanted objects are simply >>>> not linked in, without any changes to board code. This is not so >>>> trivial and also many devices are not architecturally clean yet. >>> >>> A lot of changes are need to obtain that goal, and I am not the right >>> person to do them. Until that ideal design can be developed and >>> implemented why not take a small patch that fixes the existing design? >>> It's not a major change -- a very small one actually (4 files, 13 lines >>> modified). >> >> So far the approach has been to make changes only in line with that goal. > > That's a shame. > > I'll collapse the patch series and maintain it locally then.
Patches 1, 5, 10, and 11 still look fine to me.
