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

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1144 bytes --]

Hi Rafael,

Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm between commit 2aaafcdb6883 ("cpuidle:
big.LITTLE: Add ARCH_EXYNOS entry in config") from the arm-soc tree and
commit 6ee7f5dd57fc ("cpuidle: big_little: Fix build error") from the
pm 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 drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm
index 33fc0ff0af1c,a186dec8e5df..000000000000
--- a/drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm
+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm
@@@ -1,9 -1,16 +1,10 @@@
  #
  # ARM CPU Idle drivers
  #
 -config ARM_ARMADA_370_XP_CPUIDLE
 -	bool "CPU Idle Driver for Armada 370/XP family processors"
 -	depends on ARCH_MVEBU
 -	help
 -	  Select this to enable cpuidle on Armada 370/XP processors.
 -
  config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUIDLE
  	bool "Support for ARM big.LITTLE processors"
 -	depends on ARCH_VEXPRESS_TC2_PM
 +	depends on ARCH_VEXPRESS_TC2_PM || ARCH_EXYNOS
+ 	depends on MCPM
  	select ARM_CPU_SUSPEND
  	select CPU_IDLE_MULTIPLE_DRIVERS
  	help

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

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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 12:23:05 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> --Sig_/ACOdpNyKdCGq/4_bRoeLLze
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> Hi Rafael,

Hi Stephen,

> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm between commit 2aaafcdb6883 ("cpuidle:
> big.LITTLE: Add ARCH_EXYNOS entry in config") from the arm-soc tree and
> commit 6ee7f5dd57fc ("cpuidle: big_little: Fix build error") from the
> pm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).

Thanks for the fix!


> diff --cc drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm
> index 33fc0ff0af1c,a186dec8e5df..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm
> @@@ -1,9 -1,16 +1,10 @@@
>   #
>   # ARM CPU Idle drivers
>   #
>  -config ARM_ARMADA_370_XP_CPUIDLE
>  -	bool "CPU Idle Driver for Armada 370/XP family processors"
>  -	depends on ARCH_MVEBU
>  -	help
>  -	  Select this to enable cpuidle on Armada 370/XP processors.
>  -
>   config ARM_BIG_LITTLE_CPUIDLE
>   	bool "Support for ARM big.LITTLE processors"
>  -	depends on ARCH_VEXPRESS_TC2_PM
>  +	depends on ARCH_VEXPRESS_TC2_PM || ARCH_EXYNOS
> + 	depends on MCPM
>   	select ARM_CPU_SUSPEND
>   	select CPU_IDLE_MULTIPLE_DRIVERS
>   	help
> 
> --Sig_/ACOdpNyKdCGq/4_bRoeLLze
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2
> 
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJT2FcWAAoJEMDTa8Ir7ZwVpXAP/i6U5VfuEjywNOnyq2GF13qx
> gpKWy6BNWg6TACRERzfngwOBID7nUVeQH3ksri2ReiDJkjM655dOnR2T1d4q+Txc
> CYc+TYp1x37ErXOVarlrnoVSqeNKSiARQdKLSE0ztLWfg/s+zmAuCjznbbBkFwyo
> tEbfa7kkMRo6TBopPVHevQ/Pe/s0ZVFXqS8KNyd5XImgeEmUAnvGl0KBSetA+b8u
> 1zB/U8V7d4cnWH6jRiijVDOBBs1RlmTJHV12NeKWzukjjEWd8QJ2cQHLRo/aS/js
> AVwCMUE5Q5AFAOj+aLtETpo2wc3VPNkq6QwFk4sJgmizvISQ5l/8nveBJgGU457m
> XQAHlgvhWAArtD2uowLP/aGhUJE3D3MBDs/6r/eMxfYeTBJSgfLllz9jXTayfshM
> 7saBQtwh+npKK2M4tDivUGE0zFoRj/qcCdiSB/+r0XYGaFwGIqoqEHnlsS/YElUF
> HJBCQgUPpzv832JXuJUuR5RnCOiGYiWlTGBs+WHoWXgVpVyIpZOfOPGinTbaOgIa
> 23OHAdHLTdWTg+adfKmrTGPu++OTxI985oooYhqHsmpp6MPLxC6ABgqlWlUh15zb
> sNs02B6XLBvm6Sa4v3w2anYAZCtwrO3TcihsL5mFhLHxForyq+U45qbktcZ6CBbF
> xI0c32N77d98oZMV81vN
> =U/IC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --Sig_/ACOdpNyKdCGq/4_bRoeLLze--
> 

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 543 bytes --]

Hi Rafael,

Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-ape6evm-reference.c between commit
664b4c172209 ("ARM: shmobile: ape6evm: Remove duplicate CPUFreq bits")
from the arm-soc tree and commit 978027e170fb ("cpufreq: cpu0: rename
driver and internals to 'cpufreq_dt'") from the pm tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the line updated by the latter) and
can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).

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

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

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 542 bytes --]

Hi Rafael,

Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-sh73a0.c between commit aa0bdc303b0f
("ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Remove duplicate CPUFreq bits") from the
arm-soc tree and commit 978027e170fb ("cpufreq: cpu0: rename driver and
internals to 'cpufreq_dt'") from the pm tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the lines that were updated by the
latter) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).

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

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

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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 657 bytes --]

On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 02:18:50 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-sh73a0.c between commit aa0bdc303b0f
> ("ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Remove duplicate CPUFreq bits") from the
> arm-soc tree and commit 978027e170fb ("cpufreq: cpu0: rename driver and
> internals to 'cpufreq_dt'") from the pm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the former removed the lines that were updated by the
> latter) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).

Thanks!

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Rafael,

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

  MAINTAINERS

between commit:

  e269777f72b3 ("MAINTAINERS: attach arch/arm/configs/mvebu_*_defconfig to relevant maintainers")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  9f123def55d3 ("cpufreq: mvebu: Move cpufreq code into drivers/cpufreq/")

from the pm 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 MAINTAINERS
index e7ad57a3c1f5,0bb566e7df9b..000000000000
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@@ -1328,8 -1322,9 +1328,9 @@@ F:	drivers/rtc/rtc-armada38x.
  F:	arch/arm/boot/dts/armada*
  F:	arch/arm/boot/dts/kirkwood*
  F:	arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada*
 +F:	arch/arm/configs/mvebu_*_defconfig
+ F:	drivers/cpufreq/mvebu-cpufreq.c
  
 -
  ARM/Marvell Berlin SoC support
  M:	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
  L:	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Rafael,

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

  arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi

between commits:

  66c373228dc4 ("ARM: sun8i: a33: Add the Mali OPPs")
  e6bd37627e92 ("ARM: sun8i: a33: add all operating points")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  d87bd1942058 ("PM / OPP: Use - instead of @ for DT entries")

from the pm 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.

I suspect that arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33-sinlinx-sina33.dts may need
some fixups as well.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
index 013978259372,a2c555d6475c..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
@@@ -50,73 -49,19 +50,73 @@@
  		compatible = "operating-points-v2";
  		opp-shared;
  
- 		opp@120000000 {
++		opp-120000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <120000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@240000000 {
++		opp-240000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <240000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@312000000 {
++		opp-312000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <312000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@408000000 {
++		opp-408000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <408000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@480000000 {
++		opp-480000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <480000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@504000000 {
++		opp-504000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <504000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@600000000 {
++		opp-600000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <600000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@648000000 {
+ 		opp-648000000 {
  			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <648000000>;
  			opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
  			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
  		};
  
- 		opp@720000000 {
++		opp-720000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <720000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1100000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@816000000 {
+ 		opp-816000000 {
  			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <816000000>;
  			opp-microvolt = <1100000>;
  			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
  		};
  
- 		opp@912000000 {
++		opp-912000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <912000000>;
 +			opp-microvolt = <1200000>;
 +			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@1008000000 {
+ 		opp-1008000000 {
  			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1008000000>;
  			opp-microvolt = <1200000>;
  			clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
@@@ -156,27 -100,6 +156,27 @@@
  		status = "disabled";
  	};
  
 +	iio-hwmon {
 +		compatible = "iio-hwmon";
 +		io-channels = <&ths>;
 +	};
 +
 +	mali_opp_table: gpu-opp-table {
 +		compatible = "operating-points-v2";
 +
- 		opp@144000000 {
++		opp-144000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <144000000>;
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@240000000 {
++		opp-240000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <240000000>;
 +		};
 +
- 		opp@384000000 {
++		opp-384000000 {
 +			opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <384000000>;
 +		};
 +	};
 +
  	memory {
  		reg = <0x40000000 0x80000000>;
  	};

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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, April 20, 2017 10:34:27 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   66c373228dc4 ("ARM: sun8i: a33: Add the Mali OPPs")
>   e6bd37627e92 ("ARM: sun8i: a33: add all operating points")
> 
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> 
>   d87bd1942058 ("PM / OPP: Use - instead of @ for DT entries")
> 
> from the pm tree.

Thanks for the report!

I'm going to drop the conflicting commit tomorrow.

Thanks,
Rafael

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Rafael,

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

  drivers/soc/ti/ti_sci_pm_domains.c

between commit:

  52835d59fc6c ("soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  112572283742 ("soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver")

from the pm tree.

I fixed it up (I used the pm tree version, but it was an arbitrary
choice as the only difference is the URL in the Copyright line) 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

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

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

  include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h

between commit:

  7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")

from the pm tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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

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

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>
>   include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
>
> between commit:
>
>   7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>
>   45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>
> from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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.

Dave, Santosh,

any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?

        Arnd

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

[santosh.shilimkar]

On 4/20/17 10:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>>
>>   include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>>   7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>
>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>>
>>   45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>
>> from the pm tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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.
>
> Dave, Santosh,
>
> any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
> version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?
>
Nope. Its because this series was in my 'next' branch for a week or
so and now it made it via arm-soc tree next as well.

I just cleaned up my next head so it linux-next next tag should have
only arm-soc copy.

Regards,
Santosh

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

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:39 AM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
<santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 4/20/17 10:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>   include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>   7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>>
>>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>>>
>>>   45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>>
>>> from the pm tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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.
>>
>>
>> Dave, Santosh,
>>
>> any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
>> version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?
>>
> Nope. Its because this series was in my 'next' branch for a week or
> so and now it made it via arm-soc tree next as well.
>
> I just cleaned up my next head so it linux-next next tag should have
> only arm-soc copy.

I still see two conflicting trees in linux-next as of today, neither of
them is your keystone tree:

arm-soc/next/drivers:
ae3874cc931b ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
52835d59fc6c soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
7cc119f29b19 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
213ec7fed302 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
a5ea7a0fcbd7 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct

pm/pm-domains:
9da73c55f95f ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
112572283742 soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
45da8edd1741 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
b1013fa55589 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
7030fc004df9 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
b539cc82d493 PM / Domains: Ignore domain-idle-states that are not compatible
075c37d59ecd PM / Domains: Don't warn about IRQ safe device for an
always on PM domain
1c14967c6ea0 PM / Domains: Respect errors from genpd's ->power_off() callback
ffaa42e8a40b PM / Domains: Enable users of genpd to specify always on PM domains
41e2c8e0060d PM / Domains: Clean up code validating genpd's status
8ce95844c853 PM / Domain: remove conditional from error case

For all I can tell (and matching what Stephen found), the version in
the 'pm' tree
is the one you intended to send, while the version we merged into arm-soc
has not only a different git commit ID but also some odd comments that
are not present in the PM version:

+/*
+ * TI SCI Generic Power Domain Driver
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2015-2017 Texas Instruments Incorporated -
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ti.com_&d=DwIBAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=XBn1JQGPwR8CsE7xpP3wPlG6DQU7qw8ym65xieNZ4hY&m=R6qGiR9DbG1C3EF_0mL-m-qkmSO64GklbFWpUzqt8fY&s=YTWcQCWi5lnIf4XHDLq1XDd4JbZv9xpqOwdPD8xEdZE&e=

      Arnd

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

[santosh.shilimkar]

On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:39 AM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
> <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 4/20/17 10:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>>>>
>>>>   include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
>>>>
>>>> between commit:
>>>>
>>>>   7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>>>
>>>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>>>>
>>>>   45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>>>
>>>> from the pm tree.
>>>>
>>>> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dave, Santosh,
>>>
>>> any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
>>> version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?
>>>
>> Nope. Its because this series was in my 'next' branch for a week or
>> so and now it made it via arm-soc tree next as well.
>>
>> I just cleaned up my next head so it linux-next next tag should have
>> only arm-soc copy.
>
> I still see two conflicting trees in linux-next as of today, neither of
> them is your keystone tree:
>
In the list it was agreed that the patchset goes via arm-soc tree.

ae3874c ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
52835d5 soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
7cc119f dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
213ec7f PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
a5ea7a0 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct

> arm-soc/next/drivers:
> ae3874cc931b ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
> 52835d59fc6c soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
> 7cc119f29b19 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
> 213ec7fed302 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
> a5ea7a0fcbd7 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
>
Above are the correct git object for which I sent pull request for.

> pm/pm-domains:
> 9da73c55f95f ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
> 112572283742 soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
> 45da8edd1741 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
> b1013fa55589 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
> 7030fc004df9 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
The above git object don't exist in my tree so am not sure about these
objects. I Just checked Rafael's pm-domains head and that also don't
have these objects.

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/log/?h=pm-domains


> b539cc82d493 PM / Domains: Ignore domain-idle-states that are not compatible
> 075c37d59ecd PM / Domains: Don't warn about IRQ safe device for an
> always on PM domain
> 1c14967c6ea0 PM / Domains: Respect errors from genpd's ->power_off() callback
> ffaa42e8a40b PM / Domains: Enable users of genpd to specify always on PM domains
> 41e2c8e0060d PM / Domains: Clean up code validating genpd's status
> 8ce95844c853 PM / Domain: remove conditional from error case
>
> For all I can tell (and matching what Stephen found), the version in
> the 'pm' tree
> is the one you intended to send, while the version we merged into arm-soc
> has not only a different git commit ID but also some odd comments that
> are not present in the PM version:
>
See above. The one in arm-soc tree is what I sent as pull request. Am
also confused for the git objects you pointed out in pm/pm-domains.
If they are not on the source pm-domains tree then how they landed
up in linux-next ?

Regards,
Santosh

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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, April 21, 2017 02:02:35 PM santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com wrote:
> 
> On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:39 AM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
> > <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/20/17 10:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
> >>>>
> >>>>   include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
> >>>>
> >>>> between commit:
> >>>>
> >>>>   7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
> >>>>
> >>>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> >>>>
> >>>>   45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
> >>>>
> >>>> from the pm tree.
> >>>>
> >>>> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dave, Santosh,
> >>>
> >>> any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
> >>> version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?
> >>>
> >> Nope. Its because this series was in my 'next' branch for a week or
> >> so and now it made it via arm-soc tree next as well.
> >>
> >> I just cleaned up my next head so it linux-next next tag should have
> >> only arm-soc copy.
> >
> > I still see two conflicting trees in linux-next as of today, neither of
> > them is your keystone tree:
> >
> In the list it was agreed that the patchset goes via arm-soc tree.

OK, I missed that when I looked at it again a couple of days ago, sorry.

I'll drop it from the pm-domains branch.

Thanks,
Rafael

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

[Santosh Shilimkar]

On 4/21/2017 2:31 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, April 21, 2017 02:02:35 PM santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com wrote:
>>
>> On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:39 AM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com

[...]

>>> I still see two conflicting trees in linux-next as of today, neither of
>>> them is your keystone tree:
>>>
>> In the list it was agreed that the patchset goes via arm-soc tree.
>
> OK, I missed that when I looked at it again a couple of days ago, sorry.
>
NP.

> I'll drop it from the pm-domains branch.
>
Thanks for clarification.

Regards,
Santosh

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

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02 PM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
<santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:39 AM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
>> <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/20/17 10:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>>>>>
>>>>>   include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
>>>>>
>>>>> between commit:
>>>>>
>>>>>   7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>>>>
>>>>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>>>>>
>>>>>   45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
>>>>>
>>>>> from the pm tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree version) 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dave, Santosh,
>>>>
>>>> any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
>>>> version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?
>>>>
>>> Nope. Its because this series was in my 'next' branch for a week or
>>> so and now it made it via arm-soc tree next as well.
>>>
>>> I just cleaned up my next head so it linux-next next tag should have
>>> only arm-soc copy.
>>
>>
>> I still see two conflicting trees in linux-next as of today, neither of
>> them is your keystone tree:
>>
> In the list it was agreed that the patchset goes via arm-soc tree.
>
> ae3874c ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
> 52835d5 soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
> 7cc119f dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
> 213ec7f PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
> a5ea7a0 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
>
>> arm-soc/next/drivers:
>> ae3874cc931b ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
>> 52835d59fc6c soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
>> 7cc119f29b19 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
>> 213ec7fed302 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle
>> cells
>> a5ea7a0fcbd7 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
>>
> Above are the correct git object for which I sent pull request for.

Ok, good, thanks for checking! They are however the commits that
contain the silly https://urldefense.proofpoint.com URLs. Can you
send a follow-up patch to fix these and use the regular http://www.ti.org
URL that is in linux-next?

       Arnd

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

[Santosh Shilimkar]

+Dave,

On 4/21/2017 2:44 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02 PM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
> <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

[...]

>>> arm-soc/next/drivers:
>>> ae3874cc931b ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
>>> 52835d59fc6c soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
>>> 7cc119f29b19 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
>>> 213ec7fed302 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle
>>> cells
>>> a5ea7a0fcbd7 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
>>>
>> Above are the correct git object for which I sent pull request for.
>
> Ok, good, thanks for checking! They are however the commits that
> contain the silly https://urldefense.proofpoint.com URLs. Can you
> send a follow-up patch to fix these and use the regular https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ti.org&d=DwIBaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=XBn1JQGPwR8CsE7xpP3wPlG6DQU7qw8ym65xieNZ4hY&m=vFHOEb7p2FxbH00YRQq4WnRiu2BKHADn0gl6e6DoNFQ&s=7mfiIp2Ywy9_ppWKjEGlrswiKRndv8_I7zGVF9uyT0w&e=
> URL that is in linux-next?
>
Dave,
Any reason you changed these URLs in last version ?
Can you please fixup these URLs to along with DT defines.

Regards,
Santosh

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

[Dave Gerlach]

On 04/21/2017 04:54 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> +Dave,
>
> On 4/21/2017 2:44 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02 PM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
>> <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> arm-soc/next/drivers:
>>>> ae3874cc931b ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
>>>> 52835d59fc6c soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
>>>> 7cc119f29b19 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
>>>> 213ec7fed302 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle
>>>> cells
>>>> a5ea7a0fcbd7 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
>>>>
>>> Above are the correct git object for which I sent pull request for.
>>
>> Ok, good, thanks for checking! They are however the commits that
>> contain the silly https://urldefense.proofpoint.com URLs. Can you
>> send a follow-up patch to fix these and use the regular
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ti.org&d=DwIBaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=XBn1JQGPwR8CsE7xpP3wPlG6DQU7qw8ym65xieNZ4hY&m=vFHOEb7p2FxbH00YRQq4WnRiu2BKHADn0gl6e6DoNFQ&s=7mfiIp2Ywy9_ppWKjEGlrswiKRndv8_I7zGVF9uyT0w&e=
>>
>> URL that is in linux-next?
>>
> Dave,
> Any reason you changed these URLs in last version ?
> Can you please fixup these URLs to along with DT defines.

I didn't change any of the URLs in the patches, I am not sure what those URLs 
are. In the patches I sent the URLs are fine, and I see them normal on patchwork 
too: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9660785/

Is there something that automatically changes those? I don't want to send 
another patch for it to just get mangled again.

Regards,
Dave

>
> Regards,
> Santosh

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

[Santosh Shilimkar]

On 4/24/2017 11:02 AM, Dave Gerlach wrote:
> On 04/21/2017 04:54 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> +Dave,
>>

[...]

>>> Ok, good, thanks for checking! They are however the commits that
>>> contain the silly https://urldefense.proofpoint.com URLs. Can you
>>> send a follow-up patch to fix these and use the regular
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ti.org&d=DwIBaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=XBn1JQGPwR8CsE7xpP3wPlG6DQU7qw8ym65xieNZ4hY&m=vFHOEb7p2FxbH00YRQq4WnRiu2BKHADn0gl6e6DoNFQ&s=7mfiIp2Ywy9_ppWKjEGlrswiKRndv8_I7zGVF9uyT0w&e=
>>>
>>>
>>> URL that is in linux-next?
>>>
>> Dave,
>> Any reason you changed these URLs in last version ?
>> Can you please fixup these URLs to along with DT defines.
>
> I didn't change any of the URLs in the patches, I am not sure what those
> URLs are. In the patches I sent the URLs are fine, and I see them normal
> on patchwork too:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.kernel.org_patch_9660785_&d=DwICaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=XBn1JQGPwR8CsE7xpP3wPlG6DQU7qw8ym65xieNZ4hY&m=eK4-xq3xbWwYHfuVa6ee48pvTCWUv5X5PHM285eHMLQ&s=uCfKZ0Z0T8Aaf4ircFilcu8zRVDU8XyGdbsq4OW3GaE&e=
>
> Is there something that automatically changes those? I don't want to
> send another patch for it to just get mangled again.
>
Looks like thats the case as one of my Oracle colleague pointed out.
I will send you off-list an email to get correct URL and update the git 
tree accordingly.

Regards,
Santosh

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

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1207 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  drivers/soc/ti/Makefile

between commit:

  dc1129564a01 ("soc: ti: pruss: Add a platform driver for PRUSS in TI SoCs")

from the arm-soc tree and commit:

  bca815d62054 ("PM: AVS: smartreflex Move driver to soc specific drivers")

from the pm 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 drivers/soc/ti/Makefile
index 18129aa557df,5463431ec96c..000000000000
--- a/drivers/soc/ti/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/soc/ti/Makefile
@@@ -12,4 -12,4 +12,5 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_TI_SCI_PM_DOMAINS)		+= ti_
  obj-$(CONFIG_TI_SCI_INTA_MSI_DOMAIN)	+= ti_sci_inta_msi.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_TI_K3_RINGACC)		+= k3-ringacc.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_TI_K3_SOCINFO)		+= k3-socinfo.o
 +obj-$(CONFIG_TI_PRUSS)			+= pruss.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_POWER_AVS_OMAP)		+= smartreflex.o

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