linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree

linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 745 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:

  arch/m68k/mac/misc.c

between commit:

  5b9bfb8ec467 ("m68k: mac: Use time64_t in RTC handling")

from the m68k tree and commit:

  ebd722275f9c ("macintosh/via-pmu: Replace via-pmu68k driver with via-pmu driver")

from the powerpc tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.



-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1420 bytes --]

Hi all,

[forgot the conflict resolution ...]

On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:27:20 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   5b9bfb8ec467 ("m68k: mac: Use time64_t in RTC handling")
> 
> from the m68k tree and commit:
> 
>   ebd722275f9c ("macintosh/via-pmu: Replace via-pmu68k driver with via-pmu driver")
> 
> from the powerpc tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
index 19e9d8eef1f2,28090a44fa09..3534aa6a4dc2
--- a/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
+++ b/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
@@@ -90,11 -85,11 +90,11 @@@ static void cuda_write_pram(int offset
  }
  #endif /* CONFIG_ADB_CUDA */
  
- #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU68K
+ #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU
 -static long pmu_read_time(void)
 +static time64_t pmu_read_time(void)
  {
  	struct adb_request req;
 -	long time;
 +	time64_t time;
  
  	if (pmu_request(&req, NULL, 1, PMU_READ_RTC) < 0)
  		return 0;

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Stephen,

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:42 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> [forgot the conflict resolution ...]
>
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:27:20 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   5b9bfb8ec467 ("m68k: mac: Use time64_t in RTC handling")
> >
> > from the m68k tree and commit:
> >
> >   ebd722275f9c ("macintosh/via-pmu: Replace via-pmu68k driver with via-pmu driver")
> >
> > from the powerpc tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > complex conflicts.

Ah, now I remember Finn said he was going to rebase his series once the time64_t
patch has entered my tree...

> --- a/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> +++ b/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> @@@ -90,11 -85,11 +90,11 @@@ static void cuda_write_pram(int offset
>   }
>   #endif /* CONFIG_ADB_CUDA */
>
> - #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU68K
> + #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU
>  -static long pmu_read_time(void)
>  +static time64_t pmu_read_time(void)
>   {
>         struct adb_request req;
>  -      long time;
>  +      time64_t time;
>
>         if (pmu_request(&req, NULL, 1, PMU_READ_RTC) < 0)
>                 return 0;

Thanks, looks good to me!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree

[Finn Thain]

On Thu, 2 Aug 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:42 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > [forgot the conflict resolution ...]
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:27:20 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > >   arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > >   5b9bfb8ec467 ("m68k: mac: Use time64_t in RTC handling")
> > >
> > > from the m68k tree and commit:
> > >
> > >   ebd722275f9c ("macintosh/via-pmu: Replace via-pmu68k driver with via-pmu driver")
> > >
> > > from the powerpc tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This 
> > > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial 
> > > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your 
> > > tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider 
> > > cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise 
> > > any particularly complex conflicts.
> 
> Ah, now I remember Finn said he was going to rebase his series once the 
> time64_t patch has entered my tree...
> 

The conflict I was worried about was avoided when I dropped v3 patch 10/12 
("macintosh: Use common code to access RTC"). I'll rework that patch after 
all the PMU and RTC work makes its way into Linus' tree.

> > --- a/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> > +++ b/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> > @@@ -90,11 -85,11 +90,11 @@@ static void cuda_write_pram(int offset
> >   }
> >   #endif /* CONFIG_ADB_CUDA */
> >
> > - #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU68K
> > + #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU
> >  -static long pmu_read_time(void)
> >  +static time64_t pmu_read_time(void)
> >   {
> >         struct adb_request req;
> >  -      long time;
> >  +      time64_t time;
> >
> >         if (pmu_request(&req, NULL, 1, PMU_READ_RTC) < 0)
> >                 return 0;
> 
> Thanks, looks good to me!
> 

Looks good to me, too.

Thanks.

-- 

> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
> 
>