From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 23:39:14 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2] mach-ep93xx: break out GPIO driver specifics
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdazjpKZRfpoYgZ=kC+auEj9q-KMHa6qsWsD+5Hpji+96w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1316508132-20020-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
	<20110920174012.GE7781@ponder.secretlab.ca>
	<CACRpkdazjpKZRfpoYgZ=kC+auEj9q-KMHa6qsWsD+5Hpji+96w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111001223914.GP11710@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:32:13PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> > Which tree will this go through? ?I don't think it should go via the
> > gpio tree since it is mostly within arch/arm.
> 
> It'd dependent on Russells cleanups so it'll go through Russells
> tree and his gpio cleanup branch there.

It's dependent on other stuff elsewhere too:

error: patch failed: drivers/gpio/gpio-ep93xx.c:24
error: drivers/gpio/gpio-ep93xx.c: patch does not apply

According to your patch, line 24 onwards is:

 #include <linux/module.h>
 
 #include <mach/hardware.h>

whereas I have this around line 24:

 #include <linux/basic_mmio_gpio.h>
 
 #include <mach/hardware.h>

So I've applied this with GNU patch instead, accepting the one line of
fuzz:

Hunk #1 succeeded at 23 with fuzz 1 (offset -1 lines).

As a result, I expect sfr will report a trivial merge conflict here.