From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Gavin Shan <shangw@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the powerpc tree
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:26:11 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120313182612.0546D3E053B@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120313160100.c8cc3fd2b3d1f485ef7e7954@canb.auug.org.au>
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:01:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the devicetree tree got a conflict in
> include/linux/of.h between commit eb740b5f3e65 ("powerpc/eeh: Introduce
> EEH device") from the powerpc tree and commit 0f22dd395fc4 ("of: Only
> compile OF_DYNAMIC on PowerPC pseries and iseries") from the devicetree
> tree.
>
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
>
> diff --cc include/linux/of.h
> index bdb1c07,533603e..0000000
> --- a/include/linux/of.h
> +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> @@@ -75,14 -72,10 +75,17 @@@ struct of_phandle_args
> uint32_t args[MAX_PHANDLE_ARGS];
> };
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_EEH)
> +static inline struct eeh_dev *of_node_to_eeh_dev(struct device_node *dn)
> +{
> + return dn->edev;
> +}
> +#endif
Ben, What is this? I don't want the eeh_dev pointer in struct device_node. Up to
now we've avoided putting any reverse references into device_nodes. For everything
else we use a reverse lookup, particularly for devices, to avoid growing the
device_node for each new type of lookup.
g.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Gavin Shan <shangw@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the powerpc tree
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:26:11 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120313182612.0546D3E053B@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120313160100.c8cc3fd2b3d1f485ef7e7954@canb.auug.org.au>
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:01:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the devicetree tree got a conflict in
> include/linux/of.h between commit eb740b5f3e65 ("powerpc/eeh: Introduce
> EEH device") from the powerpc tree and commit 0f22dd395fc4 ("of: Only
> compile OF_DYNAMIC on PowerPC pseries and iseries") from the devicetree
> tree.
>
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
>
> diff --cc include/linux/of.h
> index bdb1c07,533603e..0000000
> --- a/include/linux/of.h
> +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> @@@ -75,14 -72,10 +75,17 @@@ struct of_phandle_args
> uint32_t args[MAX_PHANDLE_ARGS];
> };
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_EEH)
> +static inline struct eeh_dev *of_node_to_eeh_dev(struct device_node *dn)
> +{
> + return dn->edev;
> +}
> +#endif
Ben, What is this? I don't want the eeh_dev pointer in struct device_node. Up to
now we've avoided putting any reverse references into device_nodes. For everything
else we use a reverse lookup, particularly for devices, to avoid growing the
device_node for each new type of lookup.
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-13 18:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-13 5:01 linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the powerpc tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 5:01 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 5:01 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 18:26 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2012-03-13 18:26 ` Grant Likely
2012-03-14 1:53 ` Gavin Shan
2012-03-14 1:53 ` Gavin Shan
2012-03-14 8:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-03-14 8:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-03-14 9:02 ` Gavin Shan
2012-03-14 9:02 ` Gavin Shan
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-02-18 3:48 Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 3:48 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 10:44 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-02-18 10:44 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-02-18 11:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 11:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 13:52 ` Rob Herring
2021-02-18 13:52 ` Rob Herring
2021-02-18 20:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 20:31 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 23:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-02-18 23:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2012-02-28 2:06 Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-28 2:06 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-28 2:06 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-02-28 4:38 ` Grant Likely
2012-02-28 4:38 ` Grant Likely
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=20120313182612.0546D3E053B@localhost \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=shangw@linux.vnet.ibm.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.