linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1336 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile between commit 8fc1b0f87d9f ("ARM: qcom: Split
Qualcomm support into legacy and multiplatform") from the arm-soc tree
and commit a02dd0271d01 ("ARM: mvebu: select dtbs from MACH_ARMADA_*")
from the mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
index cf8bb9f05c94,01f9ceb450ca..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
@@@ -123,9 -138,16 +139,13 @@@ kirkwood := 
  	kirkwood-ts219-6282.dtb \
  	kirkwood-ts419-6281.dtb \
  	kirkwood-ts419-6282.dtb
+ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_KIRKWOOD) += $(kirkwood)
+ dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_KIRKWOOD) += $(kirkwood)
+ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_LPC32XX) += ea3250.dtb phy3250.dtb
  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MARCO) += marco-evb.dtb
  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MOXART) += moxart-uc7112lx.dtb
- dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MVEBU) += armada-370-db.dtb \
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MSM) += qcom-msm8660-surf.dtb \
 -	qcom-msm8960-cdp.dtb \
 -	qcom-apq8074-dragonboard.dtb
+ dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_ARMADA_370) += \
+ 	armada-370-db.dtb \
  	armada-370-mirabox.dtb \
  	armada-370-netgear-rn102.dtb \
  	armada-370-netgear-rn104.dtb \

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 3:59 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 10/05/2022 01:41, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> This conflict will come to you when Gregory sends Marvel SoC pull request.
>
> The correct resolution is to take my commit 2f00bb4a69c7 ("arm64: dts:
> marvell: align SPI NOR node name with dtschema"), so the node name
> should be "flash", not "spi-flash".

Ok, thanks for the heads-up!

       Arnd

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 10/05/2022 01:41, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-3720-uDPU.dts
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   2f00bb4a69c7 ("arm64: dts: marvell: align SPI NOR node name with dtschema")
> 
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> 
>   5e9b59bd3737 ("arm64: dts: uDPU: update partition table")
> 
> from the mvebu tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just used the former) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.

Thanks Stephen, that's the correct resolution.

Arnd, Olof,

This conflict will come to you when Gregory sends Marvel SoC pull request.

The correct resolution is to take my commit 2f00bb4a69c7 ("arm64: dts:
marvell: align SPI NOR node name with dtschema"), so the node name
should be "flash", not "spi-flash".

Best regards,
Krzysztof

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 776 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-3720-uDPU.dts

between commit:

  2f00bb4a69c7 ("arm64: dts: marvell: align SPI NOR node name with dtschema")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  5e9b59bd3737 ("arm64: dts: uDPU: update partition table")

from the mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the former) 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 --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4879 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig

between various commits from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  873edb2930ef ("ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Update with current configuration")

from the mvebu 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/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
index 0c7abc87f01a,2b008248fb52..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
@@@ -169,26 -153,14 +153,16 @@@ CONFIG_IPV6_MIP6=
  CONFIG_IPV6_TUNNEL=m
  CONFIG_IPV6_MULTIPLE_TABLES=y
  CONFIG_NET_DSA=m
- CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV=y
  CONFIG_CAN=y
- CONFIG_CAN_RAW=y
- CONFIG_CAN_BCM=y
- CONFIG_CAN_DEV=y
  CONFIG_CAN_AT91=m
  CONFIG_CAN_FLEXCAN=m
- CONFIG_CAN_RCAR=m
+ CONFIG_CAN_SUN4I=y
  CONFIG_CAN_XILINXCAN=y
+ CONFIG_CAN_RCAR=m
  CONFIG_CAN_MCP251X=y
- CONFIG_NET_DSA_BCM_SF2=m
- CONFIG_B53=m
- CONFIG_B53_SPI_DRIVER=m
- CONFIG_B53_MDIO_DRIVER=m
- CONFIG_B53_MMAP_DRIVER=m
- CONFIG_B53_SRAB_DRIVER=m
- CONFIG_CAN_SUN4I=y
  CONFIG_BT=m
 +CONFIG_BT_HCIUART=m
 +CONFIG_BT_HCIUART_BCM=y
  CONFIG_BT_MRVL=m
  CONFIG_BT_MRVL_SDIO=m
  CONFIG_CFG80211=m
@@@ -272,17 -247,15 +249,16 @@@ CONFIG_DWMAC_DWC_QOS_ETH=
  CONFIG_TI_CPSW=y
  CONFIG_XILINX_EMACLITE=y
  CONFIG_AT803X_PHY=y
- CONFIG_MARVELL_PHY=y
- CONFIG_SMSC_PHY=y
  CONFIG_BROADCOM_PHY=y
  CONFIG_ICPLUS_PHY=y
- CONFIG_REALTEK_PHY=y
+ CONFIG_MARVELL_PHY=y
  CONFIG_MICREL_PHY=y
- CONFIG_FIXED_PHY=y
+ CONFIG_REALTEK_PHY=y
  CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_PHY=y
+ CONFIG_SMSC_PHY=y
  CONFIG_USB_PEGASUS=y
  CONFIG_USB_RTL8152=m
 +CONFIG_USB_LAN78XX=m
  CONFIG_USB_USBNET=y
  CONFIG_USB_NET_SMSC75XX=y
  CONFIG_USB_NET_SMSC95XX=y
@@@ -363,13 -334,10 +337,11 @@@ CONFIG_SERIAL_ST_ASC=
  CONFIG_SERIAL_ST_ASC_CONSOLE=y
  CONFIG_SERIAL_STM32=y
  CONFIG_SERIAL_STM32_CONSOLE=y
 +CONFIG_SERIAL_DEV_BUS=y
- CONFIG_HVC_DRIVER=y
  CONFIG_VIRTIO_CONSOLE=y
+ CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=y
+ CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_ST=y
  CONFIG_I2C_CHARDEV=y
- CONFIG_I2C_DAVINCI=y
- CONFIG_I2C_MESON=y
- CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y
  CONFIG_I2C_ARB_GPIO_CHALLENGE=m
  CONFIG_I2C_MUX_PCA954x=y
  CONFIG_I2C_MUX_PINCTRL=y
@@@ -381,8 -350,7 +354,8 @@@ CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=
  CONFIG_I2C_DIGICOLOR=m
  CONFIG_I2C_EMEV2=m
  CONFIG_I2C_GPIO=m
- CONFIG_I2C_EXYNOS5=y
  CONFIG_I2C_IMX=y
++CONFIG_I2C_MESON=y
  CONFIG_I2C_MV64XXX=y
  CONFIG_I2C_RIIC=y
  CONFIG_I2C_RK3X=y
@@@ -643,13 -602,17 +608,18 @@@ CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_LVDS=
  CONFIG_DRM_SUN4I=m
  CONFIG_DRM_FSL_DCU=m
  CONFIG_DRM_TEGRA=y
+ CONFIG_DRM_PANEL_SIMPLE=y
  CONFIG_DRM_PANEL_SAMSUNG_LD9040=m
 +CONFIG_DRM_PANEL_SAMSUNG_S6E63J0X03=m
  CONFIG_DRM_PANEL_SAMSUNG_S6E8AA0=m
- CONFIG_DRM_PANEL_SIMPLE=y
+ CONFIG_DRM_DUMB_VGA_DAC=m
+ CONFIG_DRM_NXP_PTN3460=m
+ CONFIG_DRM_PARADE_PS8622=m
  CONFIG_DRM_SII9234=m
+ CONFIG_DRM_I2C_ADV7511=m
+ CONFIG_DRM_I2C_ADV7511_AUDIO=y
  CONFIG_DRM_STI=m
- CONFIG_DRM_VC4=y
+ CONFIG_DRM_VC4=m
  CONFIG_DRM_ETNAVIV=m
  CONFIG_DRM_MXSFB=m
  CONFIG_FB_ARMCLCD=y
@@@ -953,8 -901,9 +908,10 @@@ CONFIG_PWM=
  CONFIG_PWM_ATMEL=m
  CONFIG_PWM_ATMEL_HLCDC_PWM=m
  CONFIG_PWM_ATMEL_TCB=m
+ CONFIG_PWM_BCM2835=y
+ CONFIG_PWM_BRCMSTB=m
  CONFIG_PWM_FSL_FTM=m
 +CONFIG_PWM_MESON=m
  CONFIG_PWM_RCAR=m
  CONFIG_PWM_RENESAS_TPU=y
  CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=m
@@@ -962,31 -912,25 +920,26 @@@ CONFIG_PWM_STI=
  CONFIG_PWM_SUN4I=y
  CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA=y
  CONFIG_PWM_VT8500=y
+ CONFIG_KEYSTONE_IRQ=y
++CONFIG_PHY_STM32_USBPHYC=y
+ CONFIG_PHY_SUN4I_USB=y
+ CONFIG_PHY_SUN9I_USB=y
  CONFIG_PHY_HIX5HD2_SATA=y
- CONFIG_E1000E=y
- CONFIG_PWM_STI=y
- CONFIG_PWM_BCM2835=y
- CONFIG_PWM_BRCMSTB=m
- CONFIG_PHY_DM816X_USB=m
- CONFIG_OMAP_USB2=y
- CONFIG_TI_PIPE3=y
- CONFIG_TWL4030_USB=m
+ CONFIG_PHY_BERLIN_SATA=y
  CONFIG_PHY_BERLIN_USB=y
  CONFIG_PHY_CPCAP_USB=m
- CONFIG_PHY_BERLIN_SATA=y
+ CONFIG_PHY_QCOM_APQ8064_SATA=m
+ CONFIG_PHY_RCAR_GEN2=m
  CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_DP=m
  CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_USB=y
- CONFIG_PHY_QCOM_APQ8064_SATA=m
+ CONFIG_PHY_SAMSUNG_USB2=m
  CONFIG_PHY_MIPHY28LP=y
- CONFIG_PHY_RCAR_GEN2=m
  CONFIG_PHY_STIH407_USB=y
- CONFIG_PHY_STM32_USBPHYC=y
- CONFIG_PHY_SUN4I_USB=y
- CONFIG_PHY_SUN9I_USB=y
- CONFIG_PHY_SAMSUNG_USB2=m
  CONFIG_PHY_TEGRA_XUSB=y
- CONFIG_PHY_BRCM_SATA=y
- CONFIG_NVMEM=y
+ CONFIG_PHY_DM816X_USB=m
+ CONFIG_OMAP_USB2=y
+ CONFIG_TI_PIPE3=y
+ CONFIG_TWL4030_USB=m
  CONFIG_NVMEM_IMX_OCOTP=y
  CONFIG_NVMEM_SUNXI_SID=y
  CONFIG_NVMEM_VF610_OCOTP=y

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Gregory,

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 10:23:07 +0200 Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> wrote:
>
> How do you want to proceed with this conflict?
> 
> Do you want that I merged arm-soc/next/arm64 in my mvebu/defconfig64
> branch before applying my patch ?
> 
> Or do you prefer that I continue to base my branch on v4.11-rc1 and then
> you will take care of the conflict when pulling the branch?

The conflict is trivial, I would hope that it will be handled when they
merge your tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Gregory CLEMENT]

Hi Olof and Arnd,
 
 On mer., avril 12 2017, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in:
>
>   arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
>
> between commit:
>
>   3c9d36192802 ("arm64: set CONFIG_MMC_BCM2835=y in defconfig")
>
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>
>   6ff829553345 ("arm64: configs: enable SDHCI driver for Xenon")
>
> from the mvebu tree.

How do you want to proceed with this conflict?

Do you want that I merged arm-soc/next/arm64 in my mvebu/defconfig64
branch before applying my patch ?

Or do you prefer that I continue to base my branch on v4.11-rc1 and then
you will take care of the conflict when pulling the branch?

Thanks,

Gregory

>
> 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.
>
> BTW, that arm-soc commit has no Signed-off-by from its committer :-(
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> index ab4461b6b226,93b0aab959c0..000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> @@@ -402,7 -401,7 +402,8 @@@ CONFIG_MMC_DW_EXYNOS=
>   CONFIG_MMC_DW_K3=y
>   CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y
>   CONFIG_MMC_SUNXI=y
>  +CONFIG_MMC_BCM2835=y
> + CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_XENON=y
>   CONFIG_NEW_LEDS=y
>   CONFIG_LEDS_CLASS=y
>   CONFIG_LEDS_GPIO=y

-- 
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig

between commit:

  3c9d36192802 ("arm64: set CONFIG_MMC_BCM2835=y in defconfig")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  6ff829553345 ("arm64: configs: enable SDHCI driver for Xenon")

from the mvebu 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.

BTW, that arm-soc commit has no Signed-off-by from its committer :-(

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
index ab4461b6b226,93b0aab959c0..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
@@@ -402,7 -401,7 +402,8 @@@ CONFIG_MMC_DW_EXYNOS=
  CONFIG_MMC_DW_K3=y
  CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y
  CONFIG_MMC_SUNXI=y
 +CONFIG_MMC_BCM2835=y
+ CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_XENON=y
  CONFIG_NEW_LEDS=y
  CONFIG_LEDS_CLASS=y
  CONFIG_LEDS_GPIO=y

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig

between commit:

  6d54fb8a08a7 ("ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Enable ST's HW Random Number Generator")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  fe767240934f ("ARM: configs: Enabling the new Marvell's cryptographic engine driver for multi_v7_defconfig")

from the mvebu 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/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
index 811b41823baa,392e970b60c7..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
@@@ -837,8 -829,7 +837,9 @@@ CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=
  CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_TEGRA_AES=y
  CONFIG_CPUFREQ_DT=y
  CONFIG_KEYSTONE_IRQ=y
 +CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=y
 +CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_ST=y
+ CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_MARVELL_CESA=m
  CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_SUN4I_SS=m
  CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_ROCKCHIP=m
  CONFIG_ARM_CRYPTO=y

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm64/configs/defconfig

between commit:

  efdda175c07f ("arm64: defconfig: add spmi and usb related configs")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  e772ca05cceb ("arm64: defconfig: enable Armada 3700 related config")

from the mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
index 91ae2634cae9,00a49b4e61c1..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
@@@ -170,9 -169,9 +173,11 @@@ CONFIG_SND_SOC=
  CONFIG_SND_SOC_RCAR=y
  CONFIG_SND_SOC_AK4613=y
  CONFIG_USB=y
 +CONFIG_USB_OTG=y
+ CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y
+ CONFIG_USB_XHCI_PLATFORM=y
  CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=y
 +CONFIG_USB_EHCI_MSM=y
  CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD_PLATFORM=y
  CONFIG_USB_OHCI_HCD=y
  CONFIG_USB_OHCI_HCD_PLATFORM=y

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 02 December 2015 14:49:52 Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> 
> > least initially. The conflict will go away once it's tested sufficiently and
> > I'm pulling it back.
> 
> By the way, when you will pull our tree, we will still have it our own
> mvebu/for-next branch. Will git managed to automagically resolve the
> conflict by getting the resolution you will do in your branch?

Yes, that should be fine, unless you resolve the same conflict differently.

> A another solution could be to have a separate patch for the
> arch/arm/Kconfig file that you keep in arm-soc.

No, I don't think that will be necessary.

	Arnd 

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Gregory CLEMENT]

Hi Arnd,
 
 On mer., déc. 02 2015, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> On Wednesday 02 December 2015 11:18:29 Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:12:44AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > 
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in  between commit
>> > 377524dc4d77f50e ("ARM: mmp: move into ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM") from the arm-soc
>> > tree and commit 5f4423af9dd17 ("ARM: orion: multiplatform support") from the
>> > mvebu tree.
>> 
>> Ccing in Arnd since I forgot to do that.
>> 
>
> I was planning to merge all the multiplatform changes into one next/multiplatform
> branch, but the mvebu maintainers preferred to keep this one in their
> tree at

Indeed except the arch/arm/Kconfig file all the other files belong to
the mbebu subsystem and it is easier to to keep in our tree to handle them.

> least initially. The conflict will go away once it's tested sufficiently and
> I'm pulling it back.

By the way, when you will pull our tree, we will still have it our own
mvebu/for-next branch. Will git managed to automagically resolve the
conflict by getting the resolution you will do in your branch?

A another solution could be to have a separate patch for the
arch/arm/Kconfig file that you keep in arm-soc.

Grégory

-- 
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 02 December 2015 11:18:29 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:12:44AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in  between commit
> > 377524dc4d77f50e ("ARM: mmp: move into ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM") from the arm-soc
> > tree and commit 5f4423af9dd17 ("ARM: orion: multiplatform support") from the
> > mvebu tree.
> 
> Ccing in Arnd since I forgot to do that.
> 

I was planning to merge all the multiplatform changes into one next/multiplatform
branch, but the mvebu maintainers preferred to keep this one in their tree at
least initially. The conflict will go away once it's tested sufficiently and
I'm pulling it back.
	
	Arnd

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1912 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:12:44AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in  between commit
> 377524dc4d77f50e ("ARM: mmp: move into ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM") from the arm-soc
> tree and commit 5f4423af9dd17 ("ARM: orion: multiplatform support") from the
> mvebu tree.

Ccing in Arnd since I forgot to do that.

> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
> index 5a328472bd8c..882f5f33bc7d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
> @@ -490,46 +490,6 @@ config ARCH_IXP4XX
>  	help
>  	  Support for Intel's IXP4XX (XScale) family of processors.
>  
> -config ARCH_DOVE
> -	bool "Marvell Dove"
> -	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
> -	select CPU_PJ4
> -	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> -	select MIGHT_HAVE_PCI
> -	select MVEBU_MBUS
> -	select PINCTRL
> -	select PINCTRL_DOVE
> -	select PLAT_ORION_LEGACY
> -	help
> -	  Support for the Marvell Dove SoC 88AP510
> -
> -config ARCH_MV78XX0
> -	bool "Marvell MV78xx0"
> -	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
> -	select CPU_FEROCEON
> -	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> -	select MVEBU_MBUS
> -	select PCI
> -	select PLAT_ORION_LEGACY
> -	help
> -	  Support for the following Marvell MV78xx0 series SoCs:
> -	  MV781x0, MV782x0.
> -
> -config ARCH_ORION5X
> -	bool "Marvell Orion"
> -	depends on MMU
> -	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
> -	select CPU_FEROCEON
> -	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> -	select MVEBU_MBUS
> -	select PCI
> -	select PLAT_ORION_LEGACY
> -	select MULTI_IRQ_HANDLER
> -	help
> -	  Support for the following Marvell Orion 5x series SoCs:
> -	  Orion-1 (5181), Orion-VoIP (5181L), Orion-NAS (5182),
> -	  Orion-2 (5281), Orion-1-90 (6183).
> -
>  config ARCH_KS8695
>  	bool "Micrel/Kendin KS8695"
>  	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1679 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in  between commit
377524dc4d77f50e ("ARM: mmp: move into ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM") from the arm-soc
tree and commit 5f4423af9dd17 ("ARM: orion: multiplatform support") from the
mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
index 5a328472bd8c..882f5f33bc7d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -490,46 +490,6 @@ config ARCH_IXP4XX
 	help
 	  Support for Intel's IXP4XX (XScale) family of processors.
 
-config ARCH_DOVE
-	bool "Marvell Dove"
-	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
-	select CPU_PJ4
-	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
-	select MIGHT_HAVE_PCI
-	select MVEBU_MBUS
-	select PINCTRL
-	select PINCTRL_DOVE
-	select PLAT_ORION_LEGACY
-	help
-	  Support for the Marvell Dove SoC 88AP510
-
-config ARCH_MV78XX0
-	bool "Marvell MV78xx0"
-	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
-	select CPU_FEROCEON
-	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
-	select MVEBU_MBUS
-	select PCI
-	select PLAT_ORION_LEGACY
-	help
-	  Support for the following Marvell MV78xx0 series SoCs:
-	  MV781x0, MV782x0.
-
-config ARCH_ORION5X
-	bool "Marvell Orion"
-	depends on MMU
-	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
-	select CPU_FEROCEON
-	select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
-	select MVEBU_MBUS
-	select PCI
-	select PLAT_ORION_LEGACY
-	select MULTI_IRQ_HANDLER
-	help
-	  Support for the following Marvell Orion 5x series SoCs:
-	  Orion-1 (5181), Orion-VoIP (5181L), Orion-NAS (5182),
-	  Orion-2 (5281), Orion-1-90 (6183).
-
 config ARCH_KS8695
 	bool "Micrel/Kendin KS8695"
 	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm/mach-mvebu/pmsu.c

between commit:

  9d2ea95a599a ("ARM: mvebu: add broken-idle option")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  da6ee32a42c0 ("ARM: mvebu: add broken-idle option")

from the mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (looks like 2 version of the same thing (though different)
so I just used the version from the arm-doc tree) and can carry the fix
as necessary (no action is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Andrew Lunn]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:20:16AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile between commit 6f1650f15bc4 ("ARM: dts: Only
> build dtb if associated Arch and/or SoC is enabled") from the arm-soc
> tree and commit dd7d2be1d2b8 ("Kirkwood: add support for Seagate
> BlackArmor NAS220") from the mvebu tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> 
> diff --cc arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> index abb810f1fe29,17ee1d6a0ac0..000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> @@@ -112,24 -101,18 +112,25 @@@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS5) += 
>   	exynos5440-sd5v1.dtb \
>   	exynos5440-ssdk5440.dtb \
>   	exynos5800-peach-pi.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += hi3620-hi4511.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIX5HD2) += hisi-x5hd2-dkb.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += highbank.dtb \
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += \
>  +	hi3620-hi4511.dtb
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIX5HD2) += \
>  +	hisi-x5hd2-dkb.dtb
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += \
>  +	highbank.dtb \
>   	ecx-2000.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIP04) += hip04-d01.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_INTEGRATOR) += integratorap.dtb \
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIP04) += \
>  +	hip04-d01.dtb
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_INTEGRATOR) += \
>  +	integratorap.dtb \
>   	integratorcp.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_KEYSTONE) += k2hk-evm.dtb \
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_KEYSTONE) += \
>  +	k2hk-evm.dtb \
>   	k2l-evm.dtb \
>   	k2e-evm.dtb
>  -dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_KIRKWOOD) += kirkwood-b3.dtb \
>  +dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_KIRKWOOD) += \
>  +	kirkwood-b3.dtb \
> + 	kirkwood-blackarmor-nas220.dtb \
>   	kirkwood-cloudbox.dtb \
>   	kirkwood-d2net.dtb \
>   	kirkwood-db-88f6281.dtb \

Hi Stephen

Thanks for the fixup.

       Andrew

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1731 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile between commit 6f1650f15bc4 ("ARM: dts: Only
build dtb if associated Arch and/or SoC is enabled") from the arm-soc
tree and commit dd7d2be1d2b8 ("Kirkwood: add support for Seagate
BlackArmor NAS220") from the mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
index abb810f1fe29,17ee1d6a0ac0..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
@@@ -112,24 -101,18 +112,25 @@@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS5) += 
  	exynos5440-sd5v1.dtb \
  	exynos5440-ssdk5440.dtb \
  	exynos5800-peach-pi.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += hi3620-hi4511.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIX5HD2) += hisi-x5hd2-dkb.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += highbank.dtb \
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += \
 +	hi3620-hi4511.dtb
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIX5HD2) += \
 +	hisi-x5hd2-dkb.dtb
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += \
 +	highbank.dtb \
  	ecx-2000.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIP04) += hip04-d01.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_INTEGRATOR) += integratorap.dtb \
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIP04) += \
 +	hip04-d01.dtb
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_INTEGRATOR) += \
 +	integratorap.dtb \
  	integratorcp.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_KEYSTONE) += k2hk-evm.dtb \
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_KEYSTONE) += \
 +	k2hk-evm.dtb \
  	k2l-evm.dtb \
  	k2e-evm.dtb
 -dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_KIRKWOOD) += kirkwood-b3.dtb \
 +dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_KIRKWOOD) += \
 +	kirkwood-b3.dtb \
+ 	kirkwood-blackarmor-nas220.dtb \
  	kirkwood-cloudbox.dtb \
  	kirkwood-d2net.dtb \
  	kirkwood-db-88f6281.dtb \

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Olof Johansson]

On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig between commit 55400f3a1f89 ("ARM: mvebu:
> clean-up unneeded kconfig selects") from the arm-soc tree and commit
> 8e6ac2033822 ("ARM: mvebu: enable the ARM SCU on Armada 375 and Armada
> 38x") from the mvebu tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).

Thanks for the heads up. This will be resolved permanently once we
merge the mvebu contents into arm-soc (since that'll go on top of the
kconfig select cleanup).


-Olof

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1495 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig between commit 55400f3a1f89 ("ARM: mvebu:
clean-up unneeded kconfig selects") from the arm-soc tree and commit
8e6ac2033822 ("ARM: mvebu: enable the ARM SCU on Armada 375 and Armada
38x") from the mvebu tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig
index bfc5af18e483,d6b0a772a6dd..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig
@@@ -3,8 -3,10 +3,9 @@@ config ARCH_MVEB
  	select ARCH_SUPPORTS_BIG_ENDIAN
  	select CLKSRC_MMIO
  	select GENERIC_IRQ_CHIP
 -	select IRQ_DOMAIN
  	select PINCTRL
  	select PLAT_ORION
+ 	select SOC_BUS
  	select MVEBU_MBUS
  	select ZONE_DMA if ARM_LPAE
  	select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB
@@@ -36,6 -39,10 +37,9 @@@ config MACH_ARMADA_37
  	select ARM_ERRATA_753970
  	select ARM_GIC
  	select ARMADA_375_CLK
 -	select CPU_V7
+ 	select HAVE_ARM_SCU
+ 	select HAVE_ARM_TWD if SMP
+ 	select HAVE_SMP
  	select MACH_MVEBU_V7
  	select PINCTRL_ARMADA_375
  	help
@@@ -48,6 -55,10 +52,9 @@@ config MACH_ARMADA_38
  	select ARM_ERRATA_753970
  	select ARM_GIC
  	select ARMADA_38X_CLK
 -	select CPU_V7
+ 	select HAVE_ARM_SCU
+ 	select HAVE_ARM_TWD if SMP
+ 	select HAVE_SMP
  	select MACH_MVEBU_V7
  	select PINCTRL_ARMADA_38X
  	help

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 552 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile between commit 8fc1b0f87d9f ("ARM: qcom: Split
Qualcomm support into legacy and multiplatform") from the arm-soc tree
and commits 97623e934388 ("Merge branch 'mvebu/dt' into for-next") and
54cab10f63f2 ("Merge branch 'mvebu/soc3' into next/dt") from the mvebu
tree.

I fixed it up (which produced no git diff) and can carry the fix as
necessary (no action is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Jason Cooper]

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 02:09:00PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> it's this commit:
> 
> commit 89602312c5755c87a5ca6ba8ef6b0fce9d510951
> Merge: a0cec78 f23afe2
> Author:     Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
> AuthorDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
> Commit:     Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
> CommitDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
> 
>     Merge remote-tracking branch 'arm-soc/for-next' into mvebu/drivers
> 

grmbl... Yep, that's my mistake.  I usually do a temp branch for
merge-testing against arm-soc/for-next and building.  Apparently I
forgot to make the branch first.  My apologies.

I've fixed up mvebu/drivers, and I'm build testing a rebuilt for-next
now.

> You merged back the for-next branch from arm-soc into your tree. Big no-no.

Yep, \shame/.

> This brings up the subject of subplatform trees and conflicts and
> -next. I wonder if we should ask Stephen to put all these trees in a
> category where if they have any substantial conflicts or weirdness
> like this, that he just drops it for the current -next build instead
> of spending effort on them.

Agreed.  A tree hierarchy of sorts.  mvebu and other sub-arch trees
should definitely be dropped for the day with minimal investigation.

thx,

Jason.

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Olof Johansson]

it's this commit:

commit 89602312c5755c87a5ca6ba8ef6b0fce9d510951
Merge: a0cec78 f23afe2
Author:     Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
AuthorDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
Commit:     Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
CommitDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000

    Merge remote-tracking branch 'arm-soc/for-next' into mvebu/drivers



You merged back the for-next branch from arm-soc into your tree. Big no-no.


This brings up the subject of subplatform trees and conflicts and
-next. I wonder if we should ask Stephen to put all these trees in a
category where if they have any substantial conflicts or weirdness
like this, that he just drops it for the current -next build instead
of spending effort on them.

That would give us on arm-soc a chance to sort out things and even
rebase patches if needed without causing a lot of extra work for sfr.


-Olof


On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 04:05:37PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got conflicts in various files
>> between merges and commits in the arm-soc tree and merges in the mvebu
>> tree.
>
> I'm afraid I'm a bit lost...
>
>> These merges/commits in the mvebu tree appear to be from a previous
>> version of the arm-soc tree that the mvebu tree has been rebased upon.
>> Please don't do that - the arm-soc tree as a whole is not stable.
>
> I didn't do anything different from the other times I built for-next.
> Could you give me a specific example when you build linux-next again?
> I'll certainly try to avoid it in the future, but it'll be easier if I
> know what 'it' is. ;-)
>
> I'll not change for-next today, and we'll see how it goes.
>
> thx,
>
> Jason.

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Jason Cooper]

Hi Stephen,

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 04:05:37PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got conflicts in various files
> between merges and commits in the arm-soc tree and merges in the mvebu
> tree.

I'm afraid I'm a bit lost...

> These merges/commits in the mvebu tree appear to be from a previous
> version of the arm-soc tree that the mvebu tree has been rebased upon.
> Please don't do that - the arm-soc tree as a whole is not stable.

I didn't do anything different from the other times I built for-next.
Could you give me a specific example when you build linux-next again?
I'll certainly try to avoid it in the future, but it'll be easier if I
know what 'it' is. ;-)

I'll not change for-next today, and we'll see how it goes.

thx,

Jason.

linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 578 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got conflicts in various files
between merges and commits in the arm-soc tree and merges in the mvebu
tree.

These merges/commits in the mvebu tree appear to be from a previous
version of the arm-soc tree that the mvebu tree has been rebased upon.
Please don't do that - the arm-soc tree as a whole is not stable.

I fixed it up (I used the version from the current arm-soc tree) and can
carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]