From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/14] ARM: mvebu: Remove init_irq declaration in machine description Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 17:53:37 +0200 Message-ID: <51910C81.5050501@free-electrons.com> References: <1368438253-28218-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1368438253-28218-10-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20130513151934.GM31290@titan.lakedaemon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([94.23.35.102]:43171 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755202Ab3EMPxl (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 May 2013 11:53:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130513151934.GM31290@titan.lakedaemon.net> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Jason Cooper , Arnd Bergmann , Olof Johansson Cc: Michal Simek , Linus Walleij , Jamie Iles , Simon Horman , Magnus Damm , Christian Daudt , Viresh Kumar , David Brown , Andrew Lunn , Gregory Clement , Shawn Guo , Barry Song , Tony Prisk , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Hi Jason, Le 13/05/2013 17:19, Jason Cooper a =E9crit : > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:44:08AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Commit ebafed7a ("ARM: irq: Call irqchip_init if no init_irq functio= n is >> specified") removed the need to explictly setup the init_irq field i= n >> the machine description when using only irqchip_init. Remove that >> declaration for mvebu as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >=20 > Maxime, >=20 > Do do want the individual submaintainers to take these? Or, send one > branch to Arnd and Olof? I'm fine with either one as any merge > conflicts should be trivial. I don't have a strong opinion on this one, I guess both will be fine. Arnd, Olof, what do you prefer? I'll probably have to send a v2 anyway, I forgot to remove the include of the irqchip headers. Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:53:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/14] ARM: mvebu: Remove init_irq declaration in machine description Message-Id: <51910C81.5050501@free-electrons.com> List-Id: References: <1368438253-28218-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1368438253-28218-10-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20130513151934.GM31290@titan.lakedaemon.net> In-Reply-To: <20130513151934.GM31290@titan.lakedaemon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hi Jason, Le 13/05/2013 17:19, Jason Cooper a =E9crit : > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:44:08AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Commit ebafed7a ("ARM: irq: Call irqchip_init if no init_irq function is >> specified") removed the need to explictly setup the init_irq field in >> the machine description when using only irqchip_init. Remove that >> declaration for mvebu as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >=20 > Maxime, >=20 > Do do want the individual submaintainers to take these? Or, send one > branch to Arnd and Olof? I'm fine with either one as any merge > conflicts should be trivial. I don't have a strong opinion on this one, I guess both will be fine. Arnd, Olof, what do you prefer? I'll probably have to send a v2 anyway, I forgot to remove the include of the irqchip headers. Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 17:53:37 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 09/14] ARM: mvebu: Remove init_irq declaration in machine description In-Reply-To: <20130513151934.GM31290@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <1368438253-28218-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1368438253-28218-10-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20130513151934.GM31290@titan.lakedaemon.net> Message-ID: <51910C81.5050501@free-electrons.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Jason, Le 13/05/2013 17:19, Jason Cooper a ?crit : > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:44:08AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Commit ebafed7a ("ARM: irq: Call irqchip_init if no init_irq function is >> specified") removed the need to explictly setup the init_irq field in >> the machine description when using only irqchip_init. Remove that >> declaration for mvebu as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > Maxime, > > Do do want the individual submaintainers to take these? Or, send one > branch to Arnd and Olof? I'm fine with either one as any merge > conflicts should be trivial. I don't have a strong opinion on this one, I guess both will be fine. Arnd, Olof, what do you prefer? I'll probably have to send a v2 anyway, I forgot to remove the include of the irqchip headers. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com