Re: 5088/3: the SPI dependency

["eric miao" <eric.y.miao@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
<g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
>> 1. I was not informed that this patch relied upon the max7301 SPI
>>    support, until I found that it didn't build.
>
> I did mention this in an email to Eric, when getting his ack to this
> patch.

Grrr, actually I sent out an email about this issue at 2nd Jul firstly,
titled "build errors of pcm027.c", and got the message that max7301
was already merged in -mm, and targeted to this merge window.
So I just didn't care about it too much.

I should be blamed for this and it's not anyone's fault  :-/

I think the problems here are:

1. Russell wasn't informed until he found this by himself
2. Having cross-tree dependency is a bad idea

For point 1, I'll try my best to make Russell being informed about
any potential issues happened in the PXA tree.

For point 2, I strongly recommend to split patch series into
two parts:

   a. driver base support
   b. machine/platform specific code for this driver _only_

Publish (a) + (b), and push (b) later when (a) is merged, though
sometimes it looks silly since (b) patches are usually trivial and
small.

I was following the above patch separation practice for a long
time, and it works for me. Note I'm not doing this to increase
my patch submission (joke :-)

-- 
Cheers
- eric

-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
FAQ:        http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
Etiquette:  http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/etiquette.php