linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [MIPS] Remove the RAMROOT function for msp71xx

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [MIPS] Remove the RAMROOT function for msp71xx
From: Shane McDonald <mcdonald.shane@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:11:25 -0600
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=doSrwH93X5Gz2CiFpyQRr2ymrpIt7ilye7TH5JLorYg=; b=Sn0/Nkkp0VDxahImu6zHMnbDEqu9AfA8p+9uBuKmwGyR/aB+jaBsxqvkNvBv53UQpg gUO4pFfhKQTjr5FbUb4fuWV0e09icKKoGBWj7Ij+zOCHk1FckS37gWAVE4Zm/xJUTvyV 09kDBm0Amk8JeUrzncKkgbbKTjk/NfLEd6YBU=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=KuTkTo7YOgiaGeei82+d8WW4FhpfP7aT5OwLOGExgQZAjy/PxpZ2x0QaOHyEYTy2Sm nIh2YA5ngir2FJmInyGGdU/DttlKmzpn5ljH7pb/THQlFPKCx9k6jZ3hLff0gNBI0/4q SSUH5F8GXfcKXLunGRnuEHzCbj+wfRC/rq9Gg=
In-reply-to: <20090429121014.GA14199@lst.de>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <E1LywHr-0006MX-S3@localhost> <20090429121014.GA14199@lst.de>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Hi Christoph:

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:10 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 05:00:27PM -0600, Shane McDonald wrote:
> The RAMROOT function was a successful but non-portable attempt to append
> the root filesystem to the end of the kernel image.  The preferred and
> portable solution is to use an initramfs instead.  This patch removes
> the RAMROOT functionality.
>
> This patch has been compile-tested against the current HEAD.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shane McDonald <mcdonald.shane@gmail.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/pmc-sierra/Kconfig            |   12 ------
>  arch/mips/pmc-sierra/msp71xx/msp_prom.c |   60 +------------------------------

Looks good to me, but now a build of drivers/mtd/maps/pmcmsp-ramroot.c
will fail.  Given that it's useless now you should probably remove it,
too.
 
 Yes, definitely.  I wanted to get this patch through before submitting the mtd patch.  Now that this one is accepted, I'll send off the other patch soon.
 
Shane

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>