[GIT PULL] DaVinci cleanups for v3.4

[GIT PULL] DaVinci cleanups for v3.4

[Nori, Sekhar]

Hi Arnd, Olof,

Can you please pull these DaVinci clean-up patches for
the v3.4 merge window? I have made sure that these don't
have any conflicts with the rmk/for-armsoc branch of
the arm-soc tree.

These patches need the following two commits from linux-next
(next-20120224) to keep the VPIF and CQ93VC drivers building.

2e932f2  ASoC: CQ93VC: remove machine specific header file inclusion from codec
db38951  [media] davinci: vpif: remove machine specific header file includes

However, there will not be any merge conflicts even if these patches
are not applied.

These patches do generate merge conflicts in latest linux-next
due to a recent DaVinci bug fix. I resolved the conflict in the
following manner:

diff --cc arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
index 1247ecd,b89bebe..864f676
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c
@@@ -40,7 -39,9 +39,9 @@@
  #include <mach/usb.h>
  #include <mach/aemif.h>
  
+ #include "davinci.h"
+ 
 -#define DM644X_EVM_PHY_ID		"0:01"
 +#define DM644X_EVM_PHY_ID		"davinci_mdio-0:01"
  #define LXT971_PHY_ID	(0x001378e2)
  #define LXT971_PHY_MASK	(0xfffffff0)
  
diff --cc arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
index 8d34f51,3d12a3a..a772bb4
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c
@@@ -39,7 -38,9 +38,9 @@@
  #include <mach/mmc.h>
  #include <mach/usb.h>
  
+ #include "davinci.h"
+ 
 -#define NEUROS_OSD2_PHY_ID		"0:01"
 +#define NEUROS_OSD2_PHY_ID		"davinci_mdio-0:01"
  #define LXT971_PHY_ID			0x001378e2
  #define LXT971_PHY_MASK			0xfffffff0
  
diff --cc arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
index 31da3c5,897cec5..76e67509
--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c
@@@ -42,7 -41,9 +41,9 @@@
  #include <mach/mux.h>
  #include <mach/usb.h>
  
+ #include "davinci.h"
+ 
 -#define SFFSDR_PHY_ID		"0:01"
 +#define SFFSDR_PHY_ID		"davinci_mdio-0:01"
  static struct mtd_partition davinci_sffsdr_nandflash_partition[] = {
  	/* U-Boot Environment: Block 0
  	 * UBL:                Block 1

The pull request follows:

The following changes since commit dcd6c92267155e70a94b3927bce681ce74b80d1f:
  Linus Torvalds (1):
        Linux 3.3-rc1

are available in the git repository at:

  git://gitorious.org/linux-davinci/linux-davinci.git v3.4/cleanup

Manjunath Hadli (8):
      ARM: davinci: dm644x: move private definitions to C file
      ARM: davinci: dm365: move private definitions to C file
      ARM: davinci: dm646x: move private definitions to C file
      ARM: davinci: create new common platform header for davinci
      ARM: davinci: streamline sysmod access
      ARM: davinci: dm644x: improve readability using macro
      ARM: davinci: dm644x: fix inconsistent variable naming
      ARM: davinci: dm644x: don't force vpfe registeration on all boards

 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm355-evm.c       |    3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm355-leopard.c   |    3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm365-evm.c       |    3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm644x-evm.c      |   28 ++++----
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c      |   32 +++------
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-neuros-osd2.c     |    3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-sffsdr.c          |    3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h               |   96 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/devices.c               |   32 ++++++---
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm355.c                 |    3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm365.c                 |   19 +++++-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c                |   53 +++++++++-----
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c                |   21 ++++--
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm355.h    |   32 --------
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm365.h    |   52 -------------
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm644x.h   |   47 ------------
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm646x.h   |   41 -----------
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/hardware.h |    2 -
 18 files changed, 218 insertions(+), 255 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-davinci/davinci.h
 delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm355.h
 delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm365.h
 delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm644x.h
 delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm646x.h

[GIT PULL] DaVinci cleanups for v3.4

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Friday 24 February 2012, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> Hi Arnd, Olof,
> 
> Can you please pull these DaVinci clean-up patches for
> the v3.4 merge window? I have made sure that these don't
> have any conflicts with the rmk/for-armsoc branch of
> the arm-soc tree.
> 
> These patches need the following two commits from linux-next
> (next-20120224) to keep the VPIF and CQ93VC drivers building.
> 
> 2e932f2  ASoC: CQ93VC: remove machine specific header file inclusion from codec
> db38951  [media] davinci: vpif: remove machine specific header file includes

In general, don't worry too much about conflicts that are easy to
resolve. However, having these extra dependencies is not good,
because it means that we cannot easily build-test the arm-soc
tree by itself and it breaks bisection through the git history.

In the future, please make sure that dependent commits show up
in the right order. For now, I've added the patch below on top
of your series.

	Arnd

commit 6ea96e111e6a7f06ef62227bf64e8cd65bd705b3
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date:   Mon Feb 27 14:55:22 2012 +0000

    ARM: davinci: add back dummy header files
    
    The mach/dm365.h and mach/dm646xh headers are currently being included
    in some device drivers. The removal of those includes is already merged
    in some subsystem trees, but adding the dummy files ensures that this
    branch can be built standalone.
    
    Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm365.h b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm365.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b9bf3d6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm365.h
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+/* empty, remove once unused */
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm646x.h b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm646x.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b9bf3d6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/dm646x.h
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+/* empty, remove once unused */

[GIT PULL] DaVinci cleanups for v3.4

[Nori, Sekhar]

Hi Arnd,

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 20:29:52, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 24 February 2012, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> > Hi Arnd, Olof,
> > 
> > Can you please pull these DaVinci clean-up patches for
> > the v3.4 merge window? I have made sure that these don't
> > have any conflicts with the rmk/for-armsoc branch of
> > the arm-soc tree.
> > 
> > These patches need the following two commits from linux-next
> > (next-20120224) to keep the VPIF and CQ93VC drivers building.
> > 
> > 2e932f2  ASoC: CQ93VC: remove machine specific header file inclusion from codec
> > db38951  [media] davinci: vpif: remove machine specific header file includes
> 
> In general, don't worry too much about conflicts that are easy to
> resolve. However, having these extra dependencies is not good,
> because it means that we cannot easily build-test the arm-soc
> tree by itself and it breaks bisection through the git history.
> 
> In the future, please make sure that dependent commits show up
> in the right order. For now, I've added the patch below on top
> of your series.

I guess the cleanest way to do that would have been to let
these patches go through my tree with appropriate maintainer
acks (but that obviously didn't happen - will try and fix
that for future). Per my understanding, it is encouraged that
a patch should get applied only through one tree, so I was
reluctant to apply them to any of the branches I send to you
after they were already in linux-next through other trees.

Thanks,
Sekhar

[GIT PULL] DaVinci cleanups for v3.4

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 28 February 2012, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> I guess the cleanest way to do that would have been to let
> these patches go through my tree with appropriate maintainer
> acks (but that obviously didn't happen - will try and fix
> that for future). Per my understanding, it is encouraged that
> a patch should get applied only through one tree, so I was
> reluctant to apply them to any of the branches I send to you
> after they were already in linux-next through other trees.

That is correct, we generally try to avoid duplicating commits
but instead use branches that are based on a common history
containing whatever is needed in multiple places.

Note that the patch I applied does not duplicate the ones that
went into the other trees, it recreates dummy header files
instead and needs to be reverted at some point in the future
when everything has been merged.

	Arnd

[GIT PULL] DaVinci cleanups for v3.4

[Nori, Sekhar]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 20:57:39, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 February 2012, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> > I guess the cleanest way to do that would have been to let
> > these patches go through my tree with appropriate maintainer
> > acks (but that obviously didn't happen - will try and fix
> > that for future). Per my understanding, it is encouraged that
> > a patch should get applied only through one tree, so I was
> > reluctant to apply them to any of the branches I send to you
> > after they were already in linux-next through other trees.
> 
> That is correct, we generally try to avoid duplicating commits
> but instead use branches that are based on a common history
> containing whatever is needed in multiple places.
> 
> Note that the patch I applied does not duplicate the ones that
> went into the other trees, it recreates dummy header files
> instead and needs to be reverted at some point in the future
> when everything has been merged.

Right. Thanks for taking care of this. Will send a revert once
the dependencies are upstream.

Thanks,
Sekhar