All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	arm@kernel.org, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: OMAP build now completely broken in latest arm-soc
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:37:07 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121126173707.GI5279@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMiv374Bhpt=Hu5o7E+eUGhX8R4w=1DLgxzzE6ieRUva=w@mail.gmail.com>

* Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> [121125 22:02]:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 05:56:58AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> >> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >> > Not much more to say...
> >> >
> >> > arch/arm/plat-omap/i2c.c:35:1: error: expected identifier or '(' before '<<' token
> >>
> >> Hmm. In for-next, line 35 is a blank line.
> >>
> >> Could this be because of a merge conflict in your local version? This
> >> is one of the files that has conflicts with mainline right now; I'll
> >> look to see if we can resolve those in our tree later today.
> >
> > Hmm, it looks like a merge conflict which didn't get fixed up... and
> > looking at it, it's beyond what I'd call trivial to fix.
> >
> > So I'll shut down the build system until that can be resolved properly;
> > as OMAP is effectively unbuildable there's not much point it running the
> > builds.
> 
> Tony, Tomi,
> 
> I've taken a stab at resolving these conflicts. They seem to come from
> the cleanups combined with fixes that went upstream, and it seems like
> we want to stick to the arm-soc versions for most of the conflicts.
> 
> I've pushed a merge of 3.7-rc7 into next/cleanup (and for-next) of
> arm-soc, can you please check and see if this is the correct
> resolution? As far as I can tell it is, but a double-check would be
> appreciated.
> 
> Conflicts were in:
> 
>         arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
>         arch/arm/plat-omap/i2c.c
>         drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss.c
> 
> The hwmod data was trivial (include files). i2c was a little hairier,
> a revert in mainline -- I presumed we're still good with our arm-soc
> contents so I stuck close to what we had there. The DSS change seems
> to be done completely differently in mainline, i.e. the surrounding
> code is different to what we have in arm-soc today, and it looks like
> the bugfix (3630-specific stuff) is taken care of in the version we
> had. So I stuck to that.

Looks like that i2c revert probably needs a fixup patch as we still
don't have the prerequisites merged. Anyways, the fixup should be done
in mach-omap2/i2c.c instead of plat-omap/i2c.c, so your merge fix
is OK.
 
> But, please speak up ASAP if the above doesn't look correct, since we
> want to fix it up before we merge much on top.

That's good, thanks.

Regards,

Tony

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: OMAP build now completely broken in latest arm-soc
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:37:07 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121126173707.GI5279@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMiv374Bhpt=Hu5o7E+eUGhX8R4w=1DLgxzzE6ieRUva=w@mail.gmail.com>

* Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> [121125 22:02]:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 05:56:58AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> >> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >> > Not much more to say...
> >> >
> >> > arch/arm/plat-omap/i2c.c:35:1: error: expected identifier or '(' before '<<' token
> >>
> >> Hmm. In for-next, line 35 is a blank line.
> >>
> >> Could this be because of a merge conflict in your local version? This
> >> is one of the files that has conflicts with mainline right now; I'll
> >> look to see if we can resolve those in our tree later today.
> >
> > Hmm, it looks like a merge conflict which didn't get fixed up... and
> > looking at it, it's beyond what I'd call trivial to fix.
> >
> > So I'll shut down the build system until that can be resolved properly;
> > as OMAP is effectively unbuildable there's not much point it running the
> > builds.
> 
> Tony, Tomi,
> 
> I've taken a stab at resolving these conflicts. They seem to come from
> the cleanups combined with fixes that went upstream, and it seems like
> we want to stick to the arm-soc versions for most of the conflicts.
> 
> I've pushed a merge of 3.7-rc7 into next/cleanup (and for-next) of
> arm-soc, can you please check and see if this is the correct
> resolution? As far as I can tell it is, but a double-check would be
> appreciated.
> 
> Conflicts were in:
> 
>         arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
>         arch/arm/plat-omap/i2c.c
>         drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss.c
> 
> The hwmod data was trivial (include files). i2c was a little hairier,
> a revert in mainline -- I presumed we're still good with our arm-soc
> contents so I stuck close to what we had there. The DSS change seems
> to be done completely differently in mainline, i.e. the surrounding
> code is different to what we have in arm-soc today, and it looks like
> the bugfix (3630-specific stuff) is taken care of in the version we
> had. So I stuck to that.

Looks like that i2c revert probably needs a fixup patch as we still
don't have the prerequisites merged. Anyways, the fixup should be done
in mach-omap2/i2c.c instead of plat-omap/i2c.c, so your merge fix
is OK.
 
> But, please speak up ASAP if the above doesn't look correct, since we
> want to fix it up before we merge much on top.

That's good, thanks.

Regards,

Tony

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-11-26 17:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-25  9:37 OMAP build now completely broken in latest arm-soc Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-25  9:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-25 13:56 ` Olof Johansson
2012-11-25 13:56   ` Olof Johansson
2012-11-25 14:07   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-25 14:07     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-26  6:00     ` Olof Johansson
2012-11-26  6:00       ` Olof Johansson
2012-11-26  8:30       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-11-26  8:30         ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-11-26 17:37       ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2012-11-26 17:37         ` Tony Lindgren
2012-11-27  1:13   ` Tony Lindgren
2012-11-27  1:13     ` Tony Lindgren

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=20121126173707.GI5279@atomide.com \
    --to=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=arm@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=tomi.valkeinen@ti.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.