[PATCH -v11 resend 10/11] arm, change reboot_mode to use enum reboot_mode

[akpm@linux-foundation.org (Andrew Morton)]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:52:02 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> On Wednesday 19 June 2013 12:58:10 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 June 2013 06:47:23 Robin Holt wrote:
> > > Preparing to move the parsing of reboot= to generic kernel code
> > > forces the change in reboot_mode handling to use the enum.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
> > > To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > > Cc: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
> > > Cc: Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>
> > > Cc: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
> > > Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
> > > Cc: Guan Xuetao <gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn>
> > > Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > > Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
> > > Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
> > 
> > Should we merge this through the arm-soc tree?
> > 
> > I'm getting a few conflicts with new platforms getting added
> > using the old interface.
> 
> Hmm, I realized after sending it that this patch depends on
> at least one other patch to add the 'enum'. Any suggestions
> for how to handle that?

This patchset gets a lot of rejects which I keep on fixing up.  Please
merge up early in the merge window and compile-test (and review) the
linux-next changes to make sure I didn't muck up the reject-fixing,
then we should be fine.