24.05.2015 23:20, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
> There is no reason for device tree API to be built per-target.
> common-obj it. There is an extraneous inclusion of config.h that
> needs to be removed.
>
> Cc: Alexander Graf
> Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber
> Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite
Applied
On 26.05.15 01:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 25/05/2015 22:46, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 24.05.15 22:20, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
There is no reason for device tree API to be built per-target.
common-obj it. There is an extraneous inclusion of config.h that
needs to be r
On 25/05/2015 22:46, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 24.05.15 22:20, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
>> > There is no reason for device tree API to be built per-target.
>> > common-obj it. There is an extraneous inclusion of config.h that
>> > needs to be removed.
>> >
>> > Cc: Alexander Graf
>> > Revie
On 24.05.15 22:20, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
> There is no reason for device tree API to be built per-target.
> common-obj it. There is an extraneous inclusion of config.h that
> needs to be removed.
>
> Cc: Alexander Graf
> Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber
> Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite
Doesn
There is no reason for device tree API to be built per-target.
common-obj it. There is an extraneous inclusion of config.h that
needs to be removed.
Cc: Alexander Graf
Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber
Signed-off-by: Peter Crosthwaite
---
Makefile.objs | 2 ++
Makefile.target | 1 -
device_tree.c