QRTR merge conflict resolution (was: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next tree)

On Fri 13 May 14:01 PDT 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Tuesday 10 May 2016 11:39:34 Bjorn Andersson wrote:
[..]
> > I assume we could have the QRTR go through Andy and arm-soc, with
> > David's approval and this fix squashed in. But we're running rather late
> > in this cycle, perhaps we should just back the QRTR patches out and I
> > can respin and resend them after the merge window (for v4.8 instead)?
> 
> I'd suggest you do a merge of next-next with the qcom/soc-2 branch that
> we have in arm-soc and resolve the conflict in the merge, then send
> a pull request with the merge to davem.
> 

Hi David,

In case you missed this thread, linux-next highlighted an upcoming merge
conflict between the net-next and one of the branches included in the
arm-soc trees.

I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
the merge conflict.

Regards,
Bjorn

The following changes since commit ed7cbbce544856b20e5811de373cf92e92499771:

  udp: Resolve NULL pointer dereference over flow-based vxlan device (2016-05-13 01:56:14 -0400)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://github.com/andersson/kernel tags/net-next-qcom-soc-4.7-2-merge

for you to fetch changes up to f79a917e69e1f5cd86e864b67f06147f1b0340f4:

  Merge tag 'qcom-soc-for-4.7-2' into net-next (2016-05-13 14:42:23 -0700)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Merge tag 'qcom-soc-for-4.7-2' into net-next

This merges the Qualcomm SOC tree with the net-next, solving the
merge conflict in the SMD API between the two.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Gross (1):
      Merge tag 'qcom-soc-for-4.7' into soc-for-4.7-p2

Bjorn Andersson (9):
      soc: qcom: smem_state: Add stubs for disabled smem_state
      soc: qcom: smd: Introduce callback setter
      soc: qcom: smd: Split discovery and state change work
      soc: qcom: smd: Refactor channel open and close handling
      soc: qcom: smd: Support multiple channels per sdev
      soc: qcom: smd: Support opening additional channels
      soc: qcom: smem: Use write-combine remap for SMEM
      soc: qcom: smd: Make callback pass channel reference
      Merge tag 'qcom-soc-for-4.7-2' into net-next

Lina Iyer (1):
      drivers: qcom: spm: avoid module usage in non-modular SPM driver

Srinivas Kandagatla (2):
      MAINTAINERS: add qcom i2c and spi drivers to list
      MAINTAINERS: add qcom clocks to the maintainers list

 MAINTAINERS                         |   3 +
 drivers/soc/qcom/smd-rpm.c          |   9 +-
 drivers/soc/qcom/smd.c              | 247 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 drivers/soc/qcom/smem.c             |   3 +-
 drivers/soc/qcom/spm.c              |   8 +-
 drivers/soc/qcom/wcnss_ctrl.c       |   8 +-
 include/linux/soc/qcom/smd.h        |  33 ++++-
 include/linux/soc/qcom/smem_state.h |  35 +++++
 net/qrtr/smd.c                      |   9 +-
 9 files changed, 278 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)

> Alternatively, in case Linus merges net-next before we get that fix
> in, I could send Stephen's fix to Linus along with the pull requests.
> 
> 	Arnd

On 13 May 2016 at 17:19, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Fri 13 May 14:01 PDT 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 10 May 2016 11:39:34 Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> [..]
>> > I assume we could have the QRTR go through Andy and arm-soc, with
>> > David's approval and this fix squashed in. But we're running rather late
>> > in this cycle, perhaps we should just back the QRTR patches out and I
>> > can respin and resend them after the merge window (for v4.8 instead)?
>>
>> I'd suggest you do a merge of next-next with the qcom/soc-2 branch that
>> we have in arm-soc and resolve the conflict in the merge, then send
>> a pull request with the merge to davem.
>>
>
> Hi David,
>
> In case you missed this thread, linux-next highlighted an upcoming merge
> conflict between the net-next and one of the branches included in the
> arm-soc trees.
>
> I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
> Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
> the merge conflict.
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>
> The following changes since commit ed7cbbce544856b20e5811de373cf92e92499771:
>
>   udp: Resolve NULL pointer dereference over flow-based vxlan device (2016-05-13 01:56:14 -0400)


OK. The contents look good to me.

Acked-by: Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>

On Friday 13 May 2016 17:47:17 Andy Gross wrote:
> On 13 May 2016 at 17:19, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Fri 13 May 14:01 PDT 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday 10 May 2016 11:39:34 Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > [..]
> >> > I assume we could have the QRTR go through Andy and arm-soc, with
> >> > David's approval and this fix squashed in. But we're running rather late
> >> > in this cycle, perhaps we should just back the QRTR patches out and I
> >> > can respin and resend them after the merge window (for v4.8 instead)?
> >>
> >> I'd suggest you do a merge of next-next with the qcom/soc-2 branch that
> >> we have in arm-soc and resolve the conflict in the merge, then send
> >> a pull request with the merge to davem.
> >>
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > In case you missed this thread, linux-next highlighted an upcoming merge
> > conflict between the net-next and one of the branches included in the
> > arm-soc trees.
> >
> > I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
> > Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
> > the merge conflict.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bjorn
> >
> > The following changes since commit ed7cbbce544856b20e5811de373cf92e92499771:
> >
> >   udp: Resolve NULL pointer dereference over flow-based vxlan device (2016-05-13 01:56:14 -0400)
> 
> 
> OK. The contents look good to me.
> 
> Acked-by: Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>

Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 15:19:09 -0700

> I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
> Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
> the merge conflict.

Pulled, thanks.

Hi David,

On Tue, 17 May 2016 14:11:54 -0400 (EDT) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 15:19:09 -0700
> 
> > I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
> > Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
> > the merge conflict.  
> 
> Pulled, thanks.

Except in the merge resolution, the 2 new functions added to
include/linux/soc/qcom/smd.h (qcom_smd_get_drvdata and
qcom_smd_set_drvdata) were not marked "static inline" :-(

On Tue 17 May 17:43 PDT 2016, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> On Tue, 17 May 2016 14:11:54 -0400 (EDT) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> >
> > From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
> > Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 15:19:09 -0700
> > 
> > > I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
> > > Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
> > > the merge conflict.  
> > 
> > Pulled, thanks.
> 
> Except in the merge resolution, the 2 new functions added to
> include/linux/soc/qcom/smd.h (qcom_smd_get_drvdata and
> qcom_smd_set_drvdata) were not marked "static inline" :-(
> 

How silly of me to miss that, sorry about that.

I didn't spot this in my compile testing either, because this is the
only driver in the tree including that file that doesn't depend on
QCOM_SMD.

As there is no immediate problem with moving forward I suggest that I'll
fix this, through arm-soc, once the code has landed.

Regards,
Bjorn