[OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx: Remove mtd cfi_cmdset_0002 status check patch

[mail at adrianschmutzler.de]

Hi Ikegami,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-bounces at lists.openwrt.org]
> On Behalf Of Tokunori Ikegami
> Sent: Samstag, 4. Januar 2020 03:06
> To: mail at adrianschmutzler.de; openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx: Remove mtd cfi_cmdset_0002 status
> check patch
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for the confirmation.
> 

Thanks for your response.

> Yes your understanding is correct.
> Also I could understand it as rejected patch since ar71xx is deprecated.
> 
> By the way how about ath79 is if deprecated as same?
> Since there are same patches in ath79 also.

I wasn't aware of that. (Actually, I didn't check as there was only a patch for ar71xx.)

In this case, you should consider resending this for ath79, and if you do that, you might also include the (identical) ar71xx version again in the same patchset (but as separate patch.)

Some comments:
1. I've looked into the code and from my perspective your patch looks correct to me. However, I would like to have Koen's statement, who was involved in changing this in the first place:
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/commit/ddc11c3932c7b7b7df7d5fbd48f207e77619eaa7
(They also do a function rename there, though.)
2. When you resend, please add the reference to this commit and state that you are reverting it partially in the commit message, so that other people do not have to look for themselves.
3. Remove the Cc: of the openwrt-devel list in the commit message, and add Koen as Cc:

I've marked the old patch as "Changes Requested".

Best

Adrian

> 
> Regards,
> Ikegami
> 
> On 2020/01/03 22:43, mail at adrianschmutzler.de wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > your patch "ar71xx: Remove mtd cfi_cmdset_0002 status check patch"
> looks cosmetical to me. Is this impression correct?
> >
> > If yes, since ar71xx is effectively deprecated and won't be included in next
> (after-19.07) release, I would reject it to save reviewing time for other
> changes.
> >
> > I hope you understand this and continue to improve OpenWrt with other
> submissions.
> >
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1198343/
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/attachments/20200104/795e9a90/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel