linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 659 bytes --]

Hi Russell,

Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
drivers/usb/gadget/ether.c between commit
41df25fad30d0e88ddc042358556f19a72d70054 ("usb ethernet gadget: use
composite gadget framework") from the usb tree and commit
7a8576204333d133d58cbcc59dacf49a5546e3e4 ("[ARM] 5120/1: pxa: correct
platform driver names for PXA25x and PXA27x UDC drivers") from the arm
tree.

I am not actually sure what to do with this.  To make it build, I have
just take the usb tree's version, but there is probably more to it than
that.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[pHilipp Zabel]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/usb/gadget/ether.c between commit
> 41df25fad30d0e88ddc042358556f19a72d70054 ("usb ethernet gadget: use
> composite gadget framework") from the usb tree and commit
> 7a8576204333d133d58cbcc59dacf49a5546e3e4 ("[ARM] 5120/1: pxa: correct
> platform driver names for PXA25x and PXA27x UDC drivers") from the arm
> tree.
>
> I am not actually sure what to do with this.  To make it build, I have
> just take the usb tree's version, but there is probably more to it than
> that.

To make it build, I guess that's just fine. The arm patch changed some
configuration variable names that the usb patch now doesn't depend upon
anymore. To make USB CDC ethernet actually work on platforms that don't
support CDC ECM, the can_support_ecm function in f_ecm.c,
which was introduced in cf4cacff582185952e6977a0e79e833df9ba357b
("usb ethernet gadget: split CDC Ethernet function") would have to be
updated to return 0 for those.
I don't know whether that is the case for pxa25x or not.

regards
Philipp

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Russell King]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:33:54PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Russell,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/usb/gadget/ether.c between commit
> 41df25fad30d0e88ddc042358556f19a72d70054 ("usb ethernet gadget: use
> composite gadget framework") from the usb tree and commit
> 7a8576204333d133d58cbcc59dacf49a5546e3e4 ("[ARM] 5120/1: pxa: correct
> platform driver names for PXA25x and PXA27x UDC drivers") from the arm
> tree.
> 
> I am not actually sure what to do with this.  To make it build, I have
> just take the usb tree's version, but there is probably more to it than
> that.

Neither am I, especially as last night I announced that everything below
a certain commit in my tree is now frozen for the merge window (which
includes this one.)

I guess whoever merges first will have the easier time.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

linux-next: Tree for Oct 22

[Thierry Reding]

Hi all,

I've uploaded today's linux-next tree to the master branch of the
repository below:

        git://gitorious.org/thierryreding/linux-next.git

A next-20131022 tag is also provided for convenience.

Gained a couple new conflicts, fixed more build failures. ARM seems to
be in pretty good shape, as is the 64-bit x86 allmodconfig.

Thierry

linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Thierry Reding]

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

	drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c

caused by commits 1bfa2c4 (DMA-API: net: broadcom/bnx2x: replace
dma_set_mask()+dma_set_coherent_mask() with new helper) and edd3147
(bnx2x: Set NETIF_F_HIGHDMA unconditionally).

I fixed it up (see below). Please verify that the resolution looks good.

Thanks,
Thierry
---
diff --cc drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
index b42f89c,38bf998..767aafb
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
@@@ -12117,12 -12079,9 +12117,8 @@@ static int bnx2x_set_coherency_mask(str
  {
  	struct device *dev = &bp->pdev->dev;
  
- 	if (dma_set_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) == 0) {
- 		if (dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) != 0) {
- 			dev_err(dev, "dma_set_coherent_mask failed, aborting\n");
- 			return -EIO;
- 		}
- 	} else if (dma_set_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) != 0) {
 -	if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) == 0) {
 -		bp->flags |= USING_DAC_FLAG;
 -	} else if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) != 0) {
++	if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) != 0 &&
++	    dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) != 0) {
  		dev_err(dev, "System does not support DMA, aborting\n");
  		return -EIO;
  	}

RE: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Dmitry Kravkov]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Thierry Reding
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 6:09 PM
> To: Russell King; Merav Sicron; David Miller; netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> 
> 	drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
> 
> caused by commits 1bfa2c4 (DMA-API: net: broadcom/bnx2x: replace
> dma_set_mask()+dma_set_coherent_mask() with new helper) and edd3147
> (bnx2x: Set NETIF_F_HIGHDMA unconditionally).
> 
> I fixed it up (see below). Please verify that the resolution looks good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Thierry
> ---
> diff --cc drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
> index b42f89c,38bf998..767aafb
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_main.c
> @@@ -12117,12 -12079,9 +12117,8 @@@ static int
> bnx2x_set_coherency_mask(str
>   {
>   	struct device *dev = &bp->pdev->dev;
> 
> - 	if (dma_set_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) == 0) {
> - 		if (dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) != 0) {
> - 			dev_err(dev, "dma_set_coherent_mask failed,
> aborting\n");
> - 			return -EIO;
> - 		}
> - 	} else if (dma_set_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) != 0) {
>  -	if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) == 0) {
>  -		bp->flags |= USING_DAC_FLAG;
>  -	} else if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) !=
> 0) {
> ++	if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) != 0 &&
> ++	    dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) != 0) {
>   		dev_err(dev, "System does not support DMA, aborting\n");
>   		return -EIO;
>   	}

The fix is correct. Thanks, Thierry.
Acked-by: Dmitry Kravkov <dmitry@broadcom.com>
 

linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 764 bytes --]

Hi Russell,

Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.c between commit
2817142f31bfbf26c216bf4f9192540c81b2d071 ("[WATCHDOG] omap_wdt.c: sync
linux-omap changes") from Linus' tree and commit
cc26b3b01bc96a8b8c36671b0dc4898b2a152ea8 ("ARM: OMAP3: Add minimal
omap3430 support") from the arm tree.

The former removed code that the latter modified.  I fixed it up
by just removing the section of code as the former patch seems to take
account of what the latter is trying to do (but it may not be correct).
You can fix it by merging Linus' tree and doing this or a similar (maybe
correct) fixup.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Russell King]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 01:27:45PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Russell,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.c between commit
> 2817142f31bfbf26c216bf4f9192540c81b2d071 ("[WATCHDOG] omap_wdt.c: sync
> linux-omap changes") from Linus' tree and commit
> cc26b3b01bc96a8b8c36671b0dc4898b2a152ea8 ("ARM: OMAP3: Add minimal
> omap3430 support") from the arm tree.
> 
> The former removed code that the latter modified.  I fixed it up
> by just removing the section of code as the former patch seems to take
> account of what the latter is trying to do (but it may not be correct).
> You can fix it by merging Linus' tree and doing this or a similar (maybe
> correct) fixup.

This sounds very messy.  I suspect I need Tony to look at that and
tell me what the right solution is.  However...

Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
fixing those, I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can
at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
dropping the new OMAP3 support.

That would include dropping the above commit causing the merge conflict.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[David Brownell]

On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Russell King wrote:
> Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
> missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
> fixing those,

Probably has to do with his travel plans, which he mentioned
last week (Thursday?).  I think he's back online in the next
day or two.


> I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can 
> at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
> dropping the new OMAP3 support.

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Tony Lindgren]

* David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> [081014 11:53]:
> On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Russell King wrote:
> > Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
> > missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
> > fixing those,

I just sent you a fix for that few hours ago.

> Probably has to do with his travel plans, which he mentioned
> last week (Thursday?).  I think he's back online in the next
> day or two.
> 
> 
> > I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can 
> > at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
> > dropping the new OMAP3 support.

Yes, I'm back online. And please don't drop these patches, sounds
like this is a trivial merge issue.

Regards,

Tony

linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Russell,

Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-pxa/include/mach/irqs.h between commit
dec5abe9219aebf6d65e9af95de1c031d7039bdb ("[ARM] Fix eseries IRQ limit")
from Linus' tree and commit 44b6deaa10e0b62fc6d6db0b673f8bfa61b745d1
("[ARM] pxa: introduce PXA_HAVE_BOARD_IRQS") from the arm tree.

I used the version of that file from the arm tree and added the following
patch.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/Kconfig
index 72ba281..0d119f8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/Kconfig
@@ -122,6 +122,7 @@ config MACH_TOSA
 config ARCH_PXA_ESERIES
 	bool "PXA based Toshiba e-series PDAs"
 	select PXA25x
+	select PXA_HAVE_BOARD_IRQS
 
 config MACH_E330
 	bool "Toshiba e330"

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Russell King]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 11:03:48AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/mach-pxa/include/mach/irqs.h between commit
> dec5abe9219aebf6d65e9af95de1c031d7039bdb ("[ARM] Fix eseries IRQ limit")
> from Linus' tree and commit 44b6deaa10e0b62fc6d6db0b673f8bfa61b745d1
> ("[ARM] pxa: introduce PXA_HAVE_BOARD_IRQS") from the arm tree.

I think you're seeing that because of my devel branch having multiple
common ancestors.  I've rebased most of the work in there so it doesn't
suffer from that problem, and it should resolve your problem.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 857 bytes --]

Hi Russell,

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:20:44 +0100 Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 11:03:48AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> > arch/arm/mach-pxa/include/mach/irqs.h between commit
> > dec5abe9219aebf6d65e9af95de1c031d7039bdb ("[ARM] Fix eseries IRQ limit")
> > from Linus' tree and commit 44b6deaa10e0b62fc6d6db0b673f8bfa61b745d1
> > ("[ARM] pxa: introduce PXA_HAVE_BOARD_IRQS") from the arm tree.
> 
> I think you're seeing that because of my devel branch having multiple
> common ancestors.  I've rebased most of the work in there so it doesn't
> suffer from that problem, and it should resolve your problem.

Ok, thanks for that.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 628 bytes --]

Hi Russell,

Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/kernel/time.c between commit
5b01a6a61c48d8e6ab4679d6e6208f5962d07b85 ("sysdev: Pass the attribute to
the low level sysdev show/store function") from the driver-core tree and
commit 205bee6ad804d7034773b5978c74dde495df2301 ("[ARM] dyntick: Remove
obsolete and unused ARM dyntick support") from the arm tree.

The arm commit just removed some code that the driver-core commit
modified.  So I removed it and can carry the fixup.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Russell King]

On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 04:57:12PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/kernel/time.c between commit
> 5b01a6a61c48d8e6ab4679d6e6208f5962d07b85 ("sysdev: Pass the attribute to
> the low level sysdev show/store function") from the driver-core tree and
> commit 205bee6ad804d7034773b5978c74dde495df2301 ("[ARM] dyntick: Remove
> obsolete and unused ARM dyntick support") from the arm tree.
> 
> The arm commit just removed some code that the driver-core commit
> modified.  So I removed it and can carry the fixup.

I think that's a merge issue which Linus is also going to have to deal
with when it happens, since there's no real solution to committing
"fixes" to our trees without the fix causing the tree in isolation to
break.

Note that the commit is not a new commit, but something that's been there
since the last merge window - it has, however, recently been rebased.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1372 bytes --]

Hi Russell,

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:12:43 +0100 Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 04:57:12PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> > arch/arm/kernel/time.c between commit
> > 5b01a6a61c48d8e6ab4679d6e6208f5962d07b85 ("sysdev: Pass the attribute to
> > the low level sysdev show/store function") from the driver-core tree and
> > commit 205bee6ad804d7034773b5978c74dde495df2301 ("[ARM] dyntick: Remove
> > obsolete and unused ARM dyntick support") from the arm tree.
> > 
> > The arm commit just removed some code that the driver-core commit
> > modified.  So I removed it and can carry the fixup.
> 
> I think that's a merge issue which Linus is also going to have to deal
> with when it happens, since there's no real solution to committing
> "fixes" to our trees without the fix causing the tree in isolation to
> break.

That's what I mean by "I .. can carry the fixup".  I assume Linus is
smarter than I am and is able to do any merge fixup I am capable of.  Or
you (or Greg) will merge/rebase on some version of Linus' tree and do the
fixup before sending your tree to him.

These messages about inter tree conflicts are mostly "heads up".
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]