[U-Boot] [PATCH 04/20] arm/km: add kmnusa board support

[Holger Brunck]

On 06/12/2012 11:57 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
>>>>  board/keymile/km_arm/km_arm.c     |    9 +-
>>>>  boards.cfg                        |    1 +
>>>>  include/configs/km/km_arm.h       |   44 +++++-
>>>>  include/configs/km_kirkwood.h     |   67 +++++++--
>>>>  6 files changed, 392 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>>>  create mode 100644 board/keymile/km_arm/128M16-1.cfg
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>>>> index 0445539..aa11268 100644
>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>>>> @@ -738,6 +738,7 @@ Sergey Lapin <slapin at ossfans.org>
>>>>  Valentin Longchamp <valentin.longchamp at keymile.com>
>>>>
>>>>       km_kirkwood     ARM926EJS (Kirkwood SoC)
>>>> +     kmnusa          ARM926EJS (Kirkwood SoC)
>>>
>>> Again.... I would like to suggest to separate out new boards
>> addition, bugfixes/updates specific to km_*boards and generic kirkwood
>> specific patches.
>>>
>>> It's always faster to merger small patch series that big one.
>>>
>>
>> Yes ok, but was has this to do with this patch? What is meant to be
>> kirkwood
>> specific? This is all board related code.
> 
> I agree, let's separate out -
> 1. bugfix/updates patch series to current code
> 2. "Kirkwood specific" means the changes to the Kirkwood related file that may affects other boards, for ex arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mach-kirkwood/*
> 3. Additional board supports
> 
> And if possible these patches should be independent so that can be pulled independently
> 

the only patch in the serie which modifies common Kirkwood related files are:
[PATCH 03/20] arm/kirkwood: protect the ENV_SPI #defines

Do you want me to send this one seperately? I can do that. So then we resend
again a new patch serie I guess...

The other stuff is only related to our boards and I would like to keep it as it
is. It would cause a lot of rebasing and reorganisation and in the end the
result is the same.

Regards
Holger