[GIT PULL] generic arm for MSM try 3

[GIT PULL] generic arm for MSM try 3

[Daniel Walker]

I dropped the copyright and rebased, but everything else is the same as
the prior pull request.

The following changes since commit 27ee8963708185b96bc84a149eb5336a249a7497:
  Linus Torvalds (1):
        Merge branch 'urgent' of git://git.kernel.org/.../brodo/pcmcia-2.6

are available in the git repository at:

  git://codeaurora.org/quic/kernel/dwalker/linux-msm.git for-russell

Daniel Walker (2):
      arm: msm: allow ARCH_MSM to have v7 cpus
      arm: msm: add oprofile pmu support

Dave Estes (1):
      arm: mm: qsd8x50: Fix incorrect permission faults

Steve Muckle (1):
      arm: msm: define HAVE_CLK for ARCH_MSM

 arch/arm/Kconfig          |   11 ++++++-----
 arch/arm/kernel/pmu.c     |    2 ++
 arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig |    2 ++
 arch/arm/mm/Kconfig       |    2 ++
 arch/arm/mm/abort-ev7.S   |   38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

[GIT PULL] generic arm for MSM try 3

[Daniel Walker]

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 11:18 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> I dropped the copyright and rebased, but everything else is the same as
> the prior pull request.
> 
> The following changes since commit 27ee8963708185b96bc84a149eb5336a249a7497:
>   Linus Torvalds (1):
>         Merge branch 'urgent' of git://git.kernel.org/.../brodo/pcmcia-2.6
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://codeaurora.org/quic/kernel/dwalker/linux-msm.git for-russell

Did I get this one wrong somehow, or are you not accepting pull requests
right now?

Daniel

[GIT PULL] generic arm for MSM try 3

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 04:18:00PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 11:18 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > I dropped the copyright and rebased, but everything else is the same as
> > the prior pull request.
> > 
> > The following changes since commit 27ee8963708185b96bc84a149eb5336a249a7497:
> >   Linus Torvalds (1):
> >         Merge branch 'urgent' of git://git.kernel.org/.../brodo/pcmcia-2.6
> > 
> > are available in the git repository at:
> > 
> >   git://codeaurora.org/quic/kernel/dwalker/linux-msm.git for-russell
> 
> Did I get this one wrong somehow, or are you not accepting pull requests
> right now?

No.  In case you didn't notice, I've been offline from 22nd to 29th April
caused by BT planned engineering works going wrong.  However, I'm back
online for the time being using alternative arrangements, and I still
regard my 'net connection to be 'at risk'.

Could you please tell me what is different in this pull request compared
to try 2?  I'm asking because it appears your tree is identical to try 2,
in spite of:

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:59:53PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 22:49 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > Well, I don't think it's fair on those who created abort-ev7.S to go
> > throwing a boilerplate copyright on the file which makes it look like
> > "Code Aurora Forum." wrote the entire thing.
>
> Ok, I updated the same branch .. It's minus the copyright and license ,
> and I rebased it onto a more recent linus tree ..

[GIT PULL] generic arm for MSM try 3

[Daniel Walker]

On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 11:44 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 04:18:00PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 11:18 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > I dropped the copyright and rebased, but everything else is the same as
> > > the prior pull request.
> > > 
> > > The following changes since commit 27ee8963708185b96bc84a149eb5336a249a7497:
> > >   Linus Torvalds (1):
> > >         Merge branch 'urgent' of git://git.kernel.org/.../brodo/pcmcia-2.6
> > > 
> > > are available in the git repository at:
> > > 
> > >   git://codeaurora.org/quic/kernel/dwalker/linux-msm.git for-russell
> > 
> > Did I get this one wrong somehow, or are you not accepting pull requests
> > right now?
> 
> No.  In case you didn't notice, I've been offline from 22nd to 29th April
> caused by BT planned engineering works going wrong.  However, I'm back
> online for the time being using alternative arrangements, and I still
> regard my 'net connection to be 'at risk'.

Yeah, I noticed that after I sent this originally. It too bad about your
BT troubles. I hope that get squared away soon.

> Could you please tell me what is different in this pull request compared
> to try 2?  I'm asking because it appears your tree is identical to try 2,
> in spite of:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:59:53PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 22:49 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > Well, I don't think it's fair on those who created abort-ev7.S to go
> > > throwing a boilerplate copyright on the file which makes it look like
> > > "Code Aurora Forum." wrote the entire thing.
> >
> > Ok, I updated the same branch .. It's minus the copyright and license ,
> > and I rebased it onto a more recent linus tree ..

Yes, I must have mistakenly dropped the "-f" from the push. I did
another rebase, and "push -f" just now. It should be as advertised
above. The same as the original pull requests only with out the
copyright.

Sorry for all the attempts ..

Daniel