From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sparc-next tree with the dma-mapping tree Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:54:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20181212.105443.739412722995225625.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20181212074420.GB29137@lst.de> <20181212161146.GA7176@lst.de> <20181212163208.GA15535@ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181212163208.GA15535@ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: sam@ravnborg.org Cc: hch@lst.de, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org From: Sam Ravnborg Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:32:08 +0100 > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 05:11:46PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 08:44:20AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> > Dave, Sam: >> > >> > should I just apply a version of Rob's tree that takes the refactoring >> > into account to the dma-mapping tree? That way we should get the right >> > result independent of the merge order. >> >> E.g. something like the patch below: >> >> -- >> >From 6ee3d6c39a0c8bc4b58fa601bb4370bdec785be7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Christoph Hellwig >> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:09:58 +0100 >> Subject: sparc: use DT node full_name in sparc_dma_alloc_resource >> >> The sparc tree already has this change for the pre-refactored code, >> but pulling it into the dma-mapping tree like this should ease >> the merge conflicts a bit. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig >> --- >> arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c >> index 51c128d80193..baa235652c27 100644 >> --- a/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c >> +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c >> @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ unsigned long sparc_dma_alloc_resource(struct device *dev, size_t len) >> res = kzalloc(sizeof(*res), GFP_KERNEL); >> if (!res) >> return 0; >> - res->name = dev->of_node->name; >> + res->name = dev->of_node->full_name; >> >> if (allocate_resource(&_sparc_dvma, res, len, _sparc_dvma.start, >> _sparc_dvma.end, PAGE_SIZE, NULL, NULL) != 0) { > > Whatever works best for everyone is fine for me, so ack from me. Yeah I'm fine with this too.