[U-Boot] [PATCH] Fix SPL build for non-ARM targets

[Scott Wood]

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.boot at 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.

BTW, the conflicting patch was 5846b11e8810f0ecc15e78b383b7709b9b785580  
("am33xx_spl_bch: simple SPL nand loader for AM33XX").  It's a NAND  
patch, in drivers/mtd/nand specifically.  I don't see my ACK on it, and  
it came in through the ti tree.

If we were having custodians sign-off patches as they apply them, you  
could tell from a glance that a patch is missing either Acked-by or  
Signed-off-by from a relevant maintainer.

-Scott