linux-next: manual merge of the mmc-uh tree with the sunxi tree

linux-next: manual merge of the mmc-uh tree with the sunxi tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 497 bytes --]

Hi Ulf,

Today's linux-next merge of the mmc-uh tree got a conflict in
drivers/mmc/host/sunxi-mmc.c between commit 6c09bb851e57 ("mmc: sunxi:
Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API") from the sunxi
tree and commit 776e24c502da ("mmc: sunxi: Removing unused code") from
the mmc-uh tree.

I fixed it up (the former includes the latter change) and can carry the
fix as necessary (no action is required).

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

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mmc-uh tree with the sunxi tree

[Ulf Hansson]

On 20 January 2015 at 04:17, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Ulf,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mmc-uh tree got a conflict in
> drivers/mmc/host/sunxi-mmc.c between commit 6c09bb851e57 ("mmc: sunxi:
> Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API") from the sunxi
> tree and commit 776e24c502da ("mmc: sunxi: Removing unused code") from
> the mmc-uh tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the former includes the latter change) and can carry the
> fix as necessary (no action is required).

Maxime,

I can't find the sunxi tree, is it listed in MAINTAINERS?

I know I have acked below patch, but that was quite a I while ago. Is
there any reason to why I can't take it through my mmc tree at this
point?
"mmc: sunxi: Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API".

Kind regards
Uffe

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mmc-uh tree with the sunxi tree

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
> I can't find the sunxi tree, is it listed in MAINTAINERS?

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mripard/linux.git#sunxi/for-next
from
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/Next/Trees#n51

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 mmc-uh tree with the sunxi tree

[Maxime Ripard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1649 bytes --]

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:27:09PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 20 January 2015 at 04:17, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > Hi Ulf,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mmc-uh tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/mmc/host/sunxi-mmc.c between commit 6c09bb851e57 ("mmc: sunxi:
> > Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API") from the sunxi
> > tree and commit 776e24c502da ("mmc: sunxi: Removing unused code") from
> > the mmc-uh tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (the former includes the latter change) and can carry the
> > fix as necessary (no action is required).
> 
> Maxime,
> 
> I can't find the sunxi tree, is it listed in MAINTAINERS?

No, it's not, I should probably add it :)

It is here: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mripard/linux.git/

> I know I have acked below patch, but that was quite a I while ago. Is
> there any reason to why I can't take it through my mmc tree at this
> point?
> "mmc: sunxi: Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API".

It still is needed to preserve bisectability, which is why you acked
it in the first place. Otherwise, you would end up with a build
breakage in the clock tree, because the mmc driver would still use the
removed custom phase functions, and a failing MMC driver in your tree
because the MMC clocks would not have the phase callbacks implemented.

It's a pretty wide window of failure, and especially for the build
breakage, I don't think it would be wise to split these patches.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mmc-uh tree with the sunxi tree

[Ulf Hansson]

On 21 January 2015 at 13:12, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:27:09PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 20 January 2015 at 04:17, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> > Hi Ulf,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the mmc-uh tree got a conflict in
>> > drivers/mmc/host/sunxi-mmc.c between commit 6c09bb851e57 ("mmc: sunxi:
>> > Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API") from the sunxi
>> > tree and commit 776e24c502da ("mmc: sunxi: Removing unused code") from
>> > the mmc-uh tree.
>> >
>> > I fixed it up (the former includes the latter change) and can carry the
>> > fix as necessary (no action is required).
>>
>> Maxime,
>>
>> I can't find the sunxi tree, is it listed in MAINTAINERS?
>
> No, it's not, I should probably add it :)
>
> It is here: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mripard/linux.git/
>
>> I know I have acked below patch, but that was quite a I while ago. Is
>> there any reason to why I can't take it through my mmc tree at this
>> point?
>> "mmc: sunxi: Convert MMC driver to the standard clock phase API".
>
> It still is needed to preserve bisectability, which is why you acked
> it in the first place. Otherwise, you would end up with a build
> breakage in the clock tree, because the mmc driver would still use the
> removed custom phase functions, and a failing MMC driver in your tree
> because the MMC clocks would not have the phase callbacks implemented.
>
> It's a pretty wide window of failure, and especially for the build
> breakage, I don't think it would be wise to split these patches.

Okay, I am fine with you taking the patch.

Kind regards
Uffe