Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-118883-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Give chance to build under !CONFIG_SMP
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Huacai Chen
 <chenhuacai@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
 Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
References: <20240326062101.9822-1-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
 <87v859e2g7.ffs@tglx>
Cc: loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 loongson-kernel@lists.loongnix.cn
From: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Message-ID: <45a74a88-83da-95db-2cfb-3cd3a3e6d68f@loongson.cn>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:26:06 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux mips64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.4.0
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87v859e2g7.ffs@tglx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 03/26/2024 06:02 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26 2024 at 14:21, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
>>
>> This patch is based on 6.9-rc1. Please let me know if it is better to
>> split it into two patches, the first one is for arch/loongarch and the
>> second one is for drivers/irqchip.
>
> Why are you asking? It's documented that patches should be split, no?

OK, thanks for your reply, I read the document [1],
but I am not sure whether it is a single logical change.
I will split it into two patches and send them ASAP.

[1] 
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#separate-your-changes

Thanks,
Tiezhu