Re: [PATCH 2/8] um: Do not use SUBARCH

[Ramkumar Ramachandra]

Richard Weinberger wrote:
> And, of course, this makes your patch valid.
> Can you also please ensure that your new defconfigs are minimal?

Yeah, it's close to a minimal configuration for the 3.10 kernel
(latest at the time of patch submission). I was aiming to minimize the
diff between the current defconfig and the two new defconfigs in
configs/. The slim diffstat does the talking:

 arch/um/Kconfig.common                          |   5 -
 arch/um/Makefile                                |  11 ++
 arch/um/{defconfig => configs/i386_defconfig}   | 209 +++++++++++++-------
 arch/um/{defconfig => configs/x86_64_defconfig} | 250 +++++++++++++++---------
 arch/x86/um/Kconfig                             |   5 +
 5 files changed, 306 insertions(+), 174 deletions(-)
 copy arch/um/{defconfig => configs/i386_defconfig} (86%)
 rename arch/um/{defconfig => configs/x86_64_defconfig} (83%)

If we find some deficiencies, we can always update it. For now, please
commit these two patches.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/