Separate arch patching (Re: [patch-mm 06/25] clockevents: Fix resume logic)

[Oleg Verych <olecom@flower.upol.cz>]

* From: Thomas Gleixner

[]
> Fixup the existing users.
>
> This removes the sysfs entry for the HPET, which is now controlled by
> the clockevents resume code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-davinci/time.c      |    2 +
>  arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c          |    1 
>  arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx/common.c     |    2 +
>  arch/arm/mach-omap1/time.c        |    1 
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/timer32k.c     |    2 +

Testers and users are most likely to run one particular arch on
one particular test bench. If individual patches are arch
separated, i think bisecting will be a little bit easier.

Thus, i would like to propose separate arch patching (x86_64/i386 mainly).

Is it possible to do that? (And even set such check in ``checkpatch''?)

You would say, why? Because current kbuild/kconfig support of builds for
whole tree.

That's because to make download, build, test and debug particular arch
more easily, i'm trying to re-think and re-do some kbuild parts. With
minimum set of files, downloaded with git one can spend less
time/bandwidth for starting testing.

>  arch/i386/kernel/apic.c           |    3 +
>  arch/i386/kernel/hpet.c           |   71 ++------------------------------------
>  arch/i386/kernel/i8253.c          |   26 ++++++-------
>  arch/i386/kernel/vmiclock.c       |    1 
>  arch/i386/xen/time.c              |    1 

Opinions?

>  arch/sh/kernel/timers/timer-tmu.c |    1 
>  arch/sparc64/kernel/time.c        |    1 
____
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/