From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:47:19 +0000
Subject: vexpress issues in next-20121029
In-Reply-To: <1352126598.10947.13.camel@hornet>
References: <508EE610.9050703@wwwdotorg.org>
 <20121105094511.GE28327@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <1352126598.10947.13.camel@hornet>
Message-ID: <201211051647.19785.arnd@arndb.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Monday 05 November 2012, Pawel Moll wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 09:45 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 09:35:32AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 04:16:59PM +0000, Pawel Moll wrote:
> > > > There was a glitch between clk-next and arm-soc - it should be fine
> > > > starting with next-20121030.
> > > 
> > > The problem is still there - my builds of my tree plus arm-soc are
> > > continuing to fail with:
> > > 
> > > arch/arm/mach-vexpress/built-in.o: In function `v2m_timer_init':
> > > reset.c:(.init.text+0xe0): undefined reference to `vexpress_clk_init'
> > > arch/arm/mach-vexpress/built-in.o: In function `v2m_dt_timer_init':
> > > reset.c:(.init.text+0x114): undefined reference to `vexpress_clk_of_init'
> > > 
> > > My guess is you have a dependency between the clk-next tree and arm-soc
> > > which you haven't told the arm-soc people about.
> > 
> > Oh, and the above seems to affect all my kautobuilds for any ARM Ltd
> > development platform - it's not just vexpress which is affected by this
> > anymore.
> 
> I've just successfully built defconfigs for vexpress, versatile and
> realview with next-20121105 so I guess Arnd simply didn't have time last
> week (the Connect event) to sort out the arm-soc tree...
> 
> Arnd, will you pull the vexpress-clk-soc (containing, as you suggested,
> the soc stuff rebased on top of the clk branch) or do you want me to do
> something else?

Sorry for not getting back to this earlier. It was indeed a very busy
week and I did not manage to pull in any branches.

I've just tried pulling in your branch again, but it appears unchanged:
The patches are still based on 807e45b328, which is a different commit
from bcd6f569e874 that is in Mike's tree. Please do as I asked you before
and rebase on top of the commit that you sent him, and make sure that
this is a commit that Mike never rebases.

	Arnd