All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the gpio tree
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:48:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120302074843.2E45A3E2DAC@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201203011228.33983.arnd@arndb.de>

On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:28:33 +0000, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got conflicts in
> > arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c between commit ab985f0f7c2c ("gpio/omap:
> > cleanup omap_gpio_mod_init function") from the gpio tree and commit
> > 63325ff235de ("ARM: OMAP1: Move 16xx GPIO system clock to platform init
> > code") from the arm-soc tree.
> > 
> > OK, I can't decide which is correct here - the former adds this code
> > inside the loop (even though it seems to not depend on anything in the
> > loop) and the latter adds it before.  I have used the former (but am
> > happy to be corrected).  And both commits remove the code in
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c.
> 
> Right, having the code outside of the loop seems correct to me, too.
> 
> Grant, I would suggest that I resolve this by merging the the
> omap/gpio/runtime-pm-cleanup branch (f86bcc3) that is in your
> tree into the arm-soc tree as a dependency for the omap1 stuff,
> with the resolution below.

Okay by me.

g.

> 
> 	Arnd
> 
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c
> @@@ -218,17 -225,34 +225,34 @@@ static int __init omap16xx_gpio_init(vo
>   	if (!cpu_is_omap16xx())
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
>  +	/*
>  +	 * Enable system clock for GPIO module.
>  +	 * The CAM_CLK_CTRL *is* really the right place.
>  +	 */
>  +	omap_writel(omap_readl(ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL) | 0x04,
>  +					ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL);
>  +
> - 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev); i++)
> - 		platform_device_register(omap16xx_gpio_dev[i]);
> + 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev); i++) {
> + 		pdev = omap16xx_gpio_dev[i];
> + 		pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> + 
> + 		res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + 		if (unlikely(!res)) {
> + 			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid mem resource.\n");
> + 			return -ENODEV;
> + 		}
>   
> - 	gpio_bank_count = ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev);
> + 		base = ioremap(res->start, resource_size(res));
> + 		if (unlikely(!base)) {
> + 			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "ioremap failed.\n");
> + 			return -ENOMEM;
> + 		}
> + 
> + 		__raw_writel(SYSCONFIG_WORD, base + OMAP1610_GPIO_SYSCONFIG);
> + 		iounmap(base);
> + 
>  -		/*
>  -		 * Enable system clock for GPIO module.
>  -		 * The CAM_CLK_CTRL *is* really the right place.
>  -		 */
>  -		omap_writel(omap_readl(ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL) | 0x04,
>  -					ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL);
>  -
> + 		platform_device_register(omap16xx_gpio_dev[i]);
> + 	}
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }

-- 
email sent from notmuch.vim plugin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the gpio tree
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:48:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120302074843.2E45A3E2DAC@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201203011228.33983.arnd@arndb.de>

On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:28:33 +0000, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got conflicts in
> > arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c between commit ab985f0f7c2c ("gpio/omap:
> > cleanup omap_gpio_mod_init function") from the gpio tree and commit
> > 63325ff235de ("ARM: OMAP1: Move 16xx GPIO system clock to platform init
> > code") from the arm-soc tree.
> > 
> > OK, I can't decide which is correct here - the former adds this code
> > inside the loop (even though it seems to not depend on anything in the
> > loop) and the latter adds it before.  I have used the former (but am
> > happy to be corrected).  And both commits remove the code in
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c.
> 
> Right, having the code outside of the loop seems correct to me, too.
> 
> Grant, I would suggest that I resolve this by merging the the
> omap/gpio/runtime-pm-cleanup branch (f86bcc3) that is in your
> tree into the arm-soc tree as a dependency for the omap1 stuff,
> with the resolution below.

Okay by me.

g.

> 
> 	Arnd
> 
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c
> @@@ -218,17 -225,34 +225,34 @@@ static int __init omap16xx_gpio_init(vo
>   	if (!cpu_is_omap16xx())
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
>  +	/*
>  +	 * Enable system clock for GPIO module.
>  +	 * The CAM_CLK_CTRL *is* really the right place.
>  +	 */
>  +	omap_writel(omap_readl(ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL) | 0x04,
>  +					ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL);
>  +
> - 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev); i++)
> - 		platform_device_register(omap16xx_gpio_dev[i]);
> + 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev); i++) {
> + 		pdev = omap16xx_gpio_dev[i];
> + 		pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> + 
> + 		res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + 		if (unlikely(!res)) {
> + 			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid mem resource.\n");
> + 			return -ENODEV;
> + 		}
>   
> - 	gpio_bank_count = ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev);
> + 		base = ioremap(res->start, resource_size(res));
> + 		if (unlikely(!base)) {
> + 			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "ioremap failed.\n");
> + 			return -ENOMEM;
> + 		}
> + 
> + 		__raw_writel(SYSCONFIG_WORD, base + OMAP1610_GPIO_SYSCONFIG);
> + 		iounmap(base);
> + 
>  -		/*
>  -		 * Enable system clock for GPIO module.
>  -		 * The CAM_CLK_CTRL *is* really the right place.
>  -		 */
>  -		omap_writel(omap_readl(ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL) | 0x04,
>  -					ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL);
>  -
> + 		platform_device_register(omap16xx_gpio_dev[i]);
> + 	}
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }

-- 
email sent from notmuch.vim plugin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-03-02  7:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-01  5:40 linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the gpio tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-01  5:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-01  5:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-01 12:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-01 12:28   ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-01 20:15   ` Tony Lindgren
2012-03-01 20:15     ` Tony Lindgren
2012-03-02  7:48   ` Grant Likely [this message]
2012-03-02  7:48     ` Grant Likely
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-05-21  7:09 Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-21  7:09 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-21  7:09 ` Stephen Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120302074843.2E45A3E2DAC@localhost \
    --to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=tarun.kanti@ti.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.