On 01/09/2013 03:38:22 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 01:53:21PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/08/2013 04:57:20 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net>
> >---
> > drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile b/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile
> >index 2c3812c..c77c0c4 100644
> >--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile
> >+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile
> >@@ -79,6 +79,10 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_TEGRA_NAND) += tegra_nand.o
> > COBJS-$(CONFIG_NAND_OMAP_GPMC) += omap_gpmc.o
> > COBJS-$(CONFIG_NAND_PLAT) += nand_plat.o
> >
> >+else # minimal SPL drivers
> >+
> >+COBJS-$(CONFIG_NAND_FSL_ELBC) += fsl_elbc_spl.o
> >+
> > endif # drivers
> > endif # nand
>
> So, it looks like this is repairing breakage that came in through a
> manual merge resolution. Should such merge resolutions not be
> posted to the list for review? Or was it posted and I missed it?
None of the above. That powerpc was broken twice (once by this, and
once by the arm head.S changes) was missed in my build testing. We
don't have spelled out rules (that I'm aware of) for manual merges
other
than asking that someone check that X still works (in this case,
am335x
NAND). It did, but I didn't read the merge myself was the problem.
The NAND Makefile breakage came from commit
79f38777947ac7685e2cef8bd977f954ab198c0e, which is a manual merge by
Albert. Why should manual merges be exempt from the rule that all
changes get posted to the list? What if next time it's a functional
breakage rather than a broken build?
I tried repeating the merge between 96764df and 9bd5c1a and the only
conflict marker was this:
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
<<<<<<< HEAD
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SIMPLE
COBJS-y += nand_spl_simple.o
endif
COBJS-$(CONFIG_SPL_NAND_AM33XX_BCH) += am335x_spl_bch.o
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD
COBJS-y += nand_spl_load.o
||||||| merged common ancestors
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SIMPLE
COBJS-y += nand_spl_simple.o
endif
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD
COBJS-y += nand_spl_load.o
=======
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_DRIVERS
NORMAL_DRIVERS=y
96764df
endif
The fsl_elbc_spl.o part was still there, so it wasn't the automatic
part of the merge that removed it.
If this was simply due to a bad patch in the ARM tree, which specific
patch was it?
-Scott
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
