Message ID | 20111123171935.GC15531@game.jcrosoft.org |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Wednesday 23 November 2011, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > this pull containt the first patch series that rework the gpio to make it more standard > and to allow the multi soc and simplify the adding of the DT > > this pull depends on previous one for the ioremaps > > The following changes since commit 55c71f1a3e29cc7cd761a358deac96d3e952128f: > > ARM: at91: make rm9200 rtc drivers soc independent (2011-11-23 23:00:11 +0800) > For some reason, this series contains another patch that you have not mentioned: "macb: unify at91 and avr32 platform data" from Jamie. The patch looks ok, but it seems that you have included it unintentionally. What should I do with this? I can rebase the series to leave that patch out, or I could apply it as well. Arnd
On 18:58 Mon 28 Nov , Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 23 November 2011, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > this pull containt the first patch series that rework the gpio to make it more standard > > and to allow the multi soc and simplify the adding of the DT > > > > this pull depends on previous one for the ioremaps > > > > The following changes since commit 55c71f1a3e29cc7cd761a358deac96d3e952128f: > > > > ARM: at91: make rm9200 rtc drivers soc independent (2011-11-23 23:00:11 +0800) > > > > For some reason, this series contains another patch that you have > not mentioned: "macb: unify at91 and avr32 platform data" from Jamie. > The patch looks ok, but it seems that you have included it unintentionally. > > What should I do with this? I can rebase the series to leave that patch out, > or I could apply it as well. I just rebase it yesterday to avoid the conflict for you I repush against rc3 and include the patch from Jamie the pull was in my to send sorry send now gain The following changes since commit d28bdfc5c80fb64bf50824920bf9b554732dec74: ARM: at91: make rm9200 rtc drivers soc independent (2011-11-28 22:50:39 +0800) are available in the git repository at: git@github.com:at91linux/linux-at91.git for-arnd-3.3-gpio Jamie Iles (1): macb: unify at91 and avr32 platform data Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD (12): ARM: at91: switch gpio clock to clkdev ARM: at91: gpio make struct at91_gpio_bank an initdata ARM: at91/boards: use -EINVAL for invalid gpio ARM: at91/soc: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/pata: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/ide: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/mmc: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/nand: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/ohci: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/udc: use gpio_is_valid to check the gpio ARM: at91/gpio: drop PIN_BASE ARM: at91/gpio: fix display of number of irq setuped arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9_devices.c | 26 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200_devices.c | 28 ++-- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260.c | 8 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 32 ++-- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9261.c | 8 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9261_devices.c | 14 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263.c | 12 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 32 ++-- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45.c | 12 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45_devices.c | 26 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl_devices.c | 16 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-1arm.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-afeb-9260v1.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-cam60.c | 6 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-cap9adk.c | 17 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-carmeva.c | 9 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-cpu9krea.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-cpuat91.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-csb337.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-csb637.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt.c | 1 + arch/arm/mach-at91/board-eb9200.c | 11 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-ecbat91.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-eco920.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-flexibity.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-foxg20.c | 9 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-gsia18s.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-kafa.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-kb9202.c | 8 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-neocore926.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-pcontrol-g20.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-picotux200.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-qil-a9260.c | 14 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-rm9200dk.c | 13 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-rm9200ek.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-rsi-ews.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9-l9260.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9260ek.c | 14 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9261ek.c | 9 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9263ek.c | 10 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9g20ek.c | 11 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9m10g45ek.c | 6 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9rlek.c | 7 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-snapper9260.c | 8 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-stamp9g20.c | 14 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-usb-a926x.c | 8 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/board-yl-9200.c | 9 +- arch/arm/mach-at91/generic.h | 1 - arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c | 79 ++++--- arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/board.h | 42 ++-- arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/gpio.h | 328 +++++++++++++-------------- arch/avr32/boards/atngw100/setup.c | 2 +- arch/avr32/boards/atstk1000/atstk1002.c | 2 +- arch/avr32/boards/favr-32/setup.c | 2 +- arch/avr32/boards/hammerhead/setup.c | 2 +- arch/avr32/boards/merisc/setup.c | 2 +- arch/avr32/boards/mimc200/setup.c | 2 +- arch/avr32/mach-at32ap/at32ap700x.c | 8 +- arch/avr32/mach-at32ap/include/mach/board.h | 7 +- drivers/ata/pata_at91.c | 6 +- drivers/ide/at91_ide.c | 2 +- drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c | 30 ++-- drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c | 8 +- drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/at91_ether.c | 3 +- drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/at91_ether.h | 4 +- drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb.c | 10 +- drivers/usb/gadget/at91_udc.c | 14 +- drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c | 12 +- include/linux/platform_data/macb.h | 17 ++ 72 files changed, 628 insertions(+), 490 deletions(-) create mode 100644 include/linux/platform_data/macb.h Best Regards, J.
Jean-Christophe, The branch that was pulled by Arnd is not the same patches that were posted for review (at least not the same as v3 of the series). In the series you posted for review, the code was correct. In your branch it breaks with: arch/arm/mach-at91/board-stamp9g20.c:126: error: expected '}' before ';' token I.e. a trivial ; vs , error, but it's the only one in the whole file (it's done on two consecutive lines). It can be found by building stamp9g20_defconfig or pcontrol_g20_defconfig. Please use more care in the future to avoid this. In particular, it is troubling that the code in your branch does not match the series you posted without any kind of notice about it. -Olof