From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 07:27:52 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP/pinmux: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag In-Reply-To: <56C1A1FE.3080403@arm.com> References: <1454351299-27440-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <56C1A1FE.3080403@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160215152751.GT19432@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Sudeep Holla [160215 02:03]: > Hi Linus, > > On 13/02/16 14:42, Linus Walleij wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > >> pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class > >> pinctrl: single: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag > >> ARM: OMAP2+: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag > >> > >> arch/arm/mach-omap2/mux.c | 4 ++-- > >> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 9 ++++----- > >> arch/arm/mach-omap2/prm_common.c | 1 + > >> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- > > > >Are these patches orthogonal so I can merge the pinctrl patch independently > >of the OMAP patches if Tony ACKs this? > > > > Thanks for the follow up. > IIUC they are dependent and remember Tony/Grygorii wanted them to be > merged together(at-least for bisectibility) AFAIK this series needs to be kept together to keep things working. > >If not: should it be merged by me or through ARM SoC/Tony? > > > > I think so. > > >Anyways waiting for maintainer feedback, but the above is good to know. > > > > Grygorii was still not sure if this works and he couldn't give it a > test. He was traveling and may need more time to get back on this. He said it does not work so clearly more work is needed. Regards, Tony