[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.

This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.

Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>

---
Applies to 3.5-rc3

Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
should they just be issued as a series?

 drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
@@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ pl022_probe(struct amba_device *adev, co
 	for (i = 0; i < num_cs; i++) {
 		int cs_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(np, "cs-gpios", i);
 
-		if (cs_gpio == -ENODEV) {
+		if (cs_gpio == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
 			status = -EPROBE_DEFER;
 			goto err_no_gpio;
 		}

[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.

This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.

Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>

---
Applies to 3.5-rc3

Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
should they just be issued as a series?

 drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
@@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ pl022_probe(struct amba_device *adev, co
 	for (i = 0; i < num_cs; i++) {
 		int cs_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(np, "cs-gpios", i);
 
-		if (cs_gpio == -ENODEV) {
+		if (cs_gpio == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
 			status = -EPROBE_DEFER;
 			goto err_no_gpio;
 		}

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

On 06/18/2012 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge wrote:
> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
> 
> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
> 
> ---
> Applies to 3.5-rc3
> 
> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
> should they just be issued as a series?
> 
>  drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
> @@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ pl022_probe(struct amba_device *adev, co
>  	for (i = 0; i < num_cs; i++) {
>  		int cs_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(np, "cs-gpios", i);
>  
> -		if (cs_gpio == -ENODEV) {
> +		if (cs_gpio == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>  			status = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>  			goto err_no_gpio;
>  		}

You can ignore this patch, Alexandre will merge this into his
yet-unapplied patch to support dt in spi-pl022.

Sorry for the noise,

Roland

[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

On 06/18/2012 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge wrote:
> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
> 
> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
> 
> ---
> Applies to 3.5-rc3
> 
> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
> should they just be issued as a series?
> 
>  drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/spi/spi-pl022.c
> @@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ pl022_probe(struct amba_device *adev, co
>  	for (i = 0; i < num_cs; i++) {
>  		int cs_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(np, "cs-gpios", i);
>  
> -		if (cs_gpio == -ENODEV) {
> +		if (cs_gpio == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
>  			status = -EPROBE_DEFER;
>  			goto err_no_gpio;
>  		}

You can ignore this patch, Alexandre will merge this into his
yet-unapplied patch to support dt in spi-pl022.

Sorry for the noise,

Roland

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote:

> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>
> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>

Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>

> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
> should they just be issued as a series?

If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
merging them.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote:

> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>
> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>

Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>

> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
> should they just be issued as a series?

If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
merging them.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Alexandre Pereira da Silva]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote:
>
>> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
>> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>>
>> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
>
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>

Acked-by: Alexandre Pereira da Silva <aletes.xgr@gmail.com>

>> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
>> should they just be issued as a series?
>
> If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
> them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
> merging them.

Ok, so lets keep the original patch as is for now.

[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Alexandre Pereira da Silva]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote:
>
>> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
>> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>>
>> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
>
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>

Acked-by: Alexandre Pereira da Silva <aletes.xgr@gmail.com>

>> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
>> should they just be issued as a series?
>
> If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
> them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
> merging them.

Ok, so lets keep the original patch as is for now.

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

On 06/18/2012 01:51 PM, Alexandre Pereira da Silva wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge-uj/7R2tJ6VmzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
>>> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>>>
>>> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge-uj/7R2tJ6VmzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Alexandre Pereira da Silva <aletes.xgr-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> 
>>> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
>>> should they just be issued as a series?
>>
>> If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
>> them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
>> merging them.
> 
> Ok, so lets keep the original patch as is for now.

When Linus Acked both patches for *spi-pl022* (dt + gpio/defer fix), and
they are not yet applied, please merge them. No need to introduce
intermediate breakage.

You can keep my Signed or Acked line for exactly this.

We'll keep the patch for *gpiolib-of* separate, of course.

Thanks,

Roland

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/

[PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

On 06/18/2012 01:51 PM, Alexandre Pereira da Silva wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote:
>>
>>> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
>>> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>>>
>>> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
>>
>> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Alexandre Pereira da Silva <aletes.xgr@gmail.com>
> 
>>> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
>>> should they just be issued as a series?
>>
>> If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
>> them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
>> merging them.
> 
> Ok, so lets keep the original patch as is for now.

When Linus Acked both patches for *spi-pl022* (dt + gpio/defer fix), and
they are not yet applied, please merge them. No need to introduce
intermediate breakage.

You can keep my Signed or Acked line for exactly this.

We'll keep the patch for *gpiolib-of* separate, of course.

Thanks,

Roland

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-pl022: Adjust probe() to of_get_named_gpio() returning -EPROBE_DEFER

[Roland Stigge]

On 06/18/2012 01:51 PM, Alexandre Pereira da Silva wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de> wrote:
>>
>>> The patch to gpiolib-of.c providing -EPROBE_DEFER as a hint to defer
>>> of_get_named_gpio*() to a later probe() breaks spi-pl022.c.
>>>
>>> This patch adjusts to this change, using -EPROBE_DEFER as indication to defer.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
>>
>> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Alexandre Pereira da Silva <aletes.xgr@gmail.com>
> 
>>> Should this patch be joined with gpiolib-of's patch to of_get_named_gpio()? Or
>>> should they just be issued as a series?
>>
>> If it's not bisectable unless you change this in the same patch then join
>> them. Else I'd put them in a series and try to figure out a good tree for
>> merging them.
> 
> Ok, so lets keep the original patch as is for now.

When Linus Acked both patches for *spi-pl022* (dt + gpio/defer fix), and
they are not yet applied, please merge them. No need to introduce
intermediate breakage.

You can keep my Signed or Acked line for exactly this.

We'll keep the patch for *gpiolib-of* separate, of course.

Thanks,

Roland