From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ryan@bluewatersys.com (Ryan Mallon) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 09:28:15 +1200 Subject: [PATCH v2 20/23] at91: Make high speed USB gadget device common In-Reply-To: <0D753D10438DA54287A00B027084269764D243016B@AUSP01VMBX24.collaborationhost.net> References: <1303364535-11557-1-git-send-email-ryan@bluewatersys.com> <1303364535-11557-21-git-send-email-ryan@bluewatersys.com> <0D753D10438DA54287A00B027084269764D243016B@AUSP01VMBX24.collaborationhost.net> Message-ID: <4DB0A16F.9030100@bluewatersys.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 22/04/11 09:21, H Hartley Sweeten wrote: > On Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:42 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote: >> >> Replace the individual high-speed UDC code for each at91 variant with >> a single implementation in devices.c >> >> Signed-off-by: Ryan Mallon >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9_devices.c | 114 ++++++------------------------ >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45_devices.c | 94 ++++--------------------- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl_devices.c | 100 ++++---------------------- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/devices.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++ >> arch/arm/mach-at91/devices.h | 20 +++++ >> 5 files changed, 150 insertions(+), 257 deletions(-) > > Thanks for sending part 12/23 of the series. > > I tried applying all of the patches to linux-next and got this on part 20/23: > > patching file arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9_devices.c > Hunk #1 FAILED at 51. > 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9_devices.c.rej > patching file arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45_devices.c > Hunk #1 FAILED at 66. > 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45_devices.c.rej > patching file arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl_devices.c > Hunk #1 FAILED at 40. > 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl_devices.c.rej > patching file arch/arm/mach-at91/devices.c > patching file arch/arm/mach-at91/devices.h > > > What kernel should this apply to? It should apply on top of 2.6.39-rc1. I can rebase it on top of -next if needed. ~Ryan