From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: OMAP2+: Prepare to move GPMC to drivers by platform data header Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:55:35 -0800 Message-ID: <20141121165535.GT7046@atomide.com> References: <1416522501-14999-1-git-send-email-tony@atomide.com> <1416522501-14999-2-git-send-email-tony@atomide.com> <546F05C3.6090508@ti.com> <20141121161529.GQ7046@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:46177 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755353AbaKUQzu (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2014 11:55:50 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141121161529.GQ7046@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Roger Quadros Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Arnd Bergmann * Tony Lindgren [141121 08:18]: > * Roger Quadros [141121 01:30]: > > On 11/21/2014 12:28 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > +#include > > > +#include > > > > I think we should get rid for mach-omap2/gpmc.h and include the above two > > headers wherever needed. > > Well I'm trying to keep the churn on patching all board-*.c files > down to minimum until they just get dropped. > > So let's keep gpmc.h around still for a little while for all the > board-*.c files. > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > > > index 175564c..88721df 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > > > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > #include > > > > > > #include > > > @@ -43,7 +44,6 @@ > > > #include "common.h" > > > #include "cm3xxx.h" > > > #include "cm-regbits-34xx.h" > > > -#include "gpmc.h" > > > #include "prm-regbits-34xx.h" > > > #include "prm3xxx.h" > > > #include "pm.h" > > And for the files that will stay around, let's not include gpmc.h. After updating this patch to remove include of gpmc.h in any files this patch touches, we still have gpmc.h left in 11 files we're not touching right now. If we want to patch those, we can do it later on in a separate patch to avoid creating more dependencies between branches. Regards, Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:55:35 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: OMAP2+: Prepare to move GPMC to drivers by platform data header In-Reply-To: <20141121161529.GQ7046@atomide.com> References: <1416522501-14999-1-git-send-email-tony@atomide.com> <1416522501-14999-2-git-send-email-tony@atomide.com> <546F05C3.6090508@ti.com> <20141121161529.GQ7046@atomide.com> Message-ID: <20141121165535.GT7046@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Tony Lindgren [141121 08:18]: > * Roger Quadros [141121 01:30]: > > On 11/21/2014 12:28 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > +#include > > > +#include > > > > I think we should get rid for mach-omap2/gpmc.h and include the above two > > headers wherever needed. > > Well I'm trying to keep the churn on patching all board-*.c files > down to minimum until they just get dropped. > > So let's keep gpmc.h around still for a little while for all the > board-*.c files. > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > > > index 175564c..88721df 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > > > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > #include > > > > > > #include > > > @@ -43,7 +44,6 @@ > > > #include "common.h" > > > #include "cm3xxx.h" > > > #include "cm-regbits-34xx.h" > > > -#include "gpmc.h" > > > #include "prm-regbits-34xx.h" > > > #include "prm3xxx.h" > > > #include "pm.h" > > And for the files that will stay around, let's not include gpmc.h. After updating this patch to remove include of gpmc.h in any files this patch touches, we still have gpmc.h left in 11 files we're not touching right now. If we want to patch those, we can do it later on in a separate patch to avoid creating more dependencies between branches. Regards, Tony