linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree
Subsystems (3)
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.
Signature · 3 lines
Cheers, Stephen Rothwell [email protected] http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Quoted 9 lines · Stephen Rothwell
Hi Russell,
Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.cbetween commit2817142f31bfbf26c216bf4f9192540c81b2d071("[WATCHDOG]omap_wdt.c: sync linux-omap changes") from Linus' tree and commitcc26b3b01bc96a8b8c36671b0dc4898b2a152ea8("ARM: OMAP3: Add minimal omap3430 support") from the arm tree.
Quoted 5 lines
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.
Signature · 3 lines
Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of:
Quoted 3 lines · Russell King
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.
Quoted 3 lines
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.
Quoted 4 lines · David Brownell
Quoted 3 lines · Russell King
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.
Quoted 8 lines
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.
Quoted 3 lines
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
PATCH 1/1 ARM: OMAP: Revert omap3 WDT changes to avoid merge conflict (Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree)
Quoted 13 lines · Tony Lindgren
Quoted 4 lines · David Brownell
Quoted 3 lines · Russell King
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.
Quoted 5 lines
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.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
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.
And here's the patch for Russell to avoid the merge conflict. Also in Russell's patch tracking system as patch 5302/1.
Quoted 4 lines
Regards,
Tony
From: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:25:20 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: Revert omap3 WDT changes to avoid merge conflict
With the upcoming WDT patches OMAP_WDT_BASE is no longer needed in devices.c. Revert some earlier omap3 changes to avoid merge conflicts with the WDT patches.
arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.c +1 -10
@@ -399,17 +399,8 @@ static inline void omap_init_uwire(void) {}#if defined(CONFIG_OMAP_WATCHDOG ) || defined(CONFIG_OMAP_WATCHDOG_MODULE ) -#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP34XX ) -#define OMAP_WDT_BASE 0x48314000 -#elif defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP24XX ) - -#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2430 -/* WDT2 */ -#define OMAP_WDT_BASE 0x49016000 -#else +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP24XX #define OMAP_WDT_BASE 0x48022000 -#endif -#else #define OMAP_WDT_BASE 0xfffeb000#endif
Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: Revert omap3 WDT changes to avoid merge conflict (Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree)
Quoted 2 lines · Tony Lindgren
And here's the patch for Russell to avoid the merge conflict. Also in Russell's patch tracking system as patch 5302/1.
This evening, only now having the time to investigate what's going on there (as a result of added your other patch to fix the build error I reported on Saturday) it turns out to be much more trivial a conflict than I was suspecting from sfr's description.
However, the results of the final merge with 'master' on my devel branch never go to Linus, so your patch may still be required.
Signature · 3 lines
Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: