From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 22:22:12 +0000 Subject: [GIT PULL] Linux support for ARM LPAE In-Reply-To: References: <20111202182054.GA3250@arm.com> <20111206124109.GT14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20111206140729.GA31720@arm.com> <20111206233058.GZ14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20111207112320.GB23720@arm.com> <20111207122544.GD23720@arm.com> <20111207202912.GE14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20111207222212.GG14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 10:15:24PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On 7 December 2011 20:29, Russell King - ARM Linux > wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 12:25:44PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >> ARM: pgtable: Fix compiler warning in ioremap.c introduced by nopud > >> > >> From: Catalin Marinas > >> > >> With the arch/arm code conversion to pgtable-nopud.h, the section and > >> supersection (un|re)map code triggers compiler warnings on UP systems. > >> This is caused by pmd_offset() being given a pgd_t argument rather than > >> a pud_t one. This patch makes the necessary conversion via pud_alloc() > >> and pmd_alloc(). > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas > > > > So, do I now take this email as you saying that _your_ LPAE tree is > > not ready for merging because you want to rework this patch, or what? > > No, I'm not, it's you saying that your nopud patch does not have any > fix for the warnings, even though I had fixes posted for months. Stop it Catalin. You're being utterly rediculous. You asked why I hadn't merged my patch during the last merge window. So I told you - just like I've been telling you by email and during our monthly calls why I've not been merging it. You asked the question (again) so I told you why (again). > The > same fix that's in my LPAE series was sent to you to include with your > patch but instead you kept saying (even twice in the past week) that > those warning had no fix. Utter rubbish. I'll say it again. You asked why I hadn't merged my patch. So I told you - just like I've been telling you by email and during our monthly calls why I've not been merging it. You asked the question (again) so I told you why. > From that, I understand that you really > don't consider my patch a proper fix for the compiler warnings. WTF. > > Because you've decided to go down the path of reworking this patch, > > I consider it dangerous for me to just pull from your tree again - I've > > no idea what I'd get, and I've no idea whether what's there is what you > > want me to merge. > > I haven't changed anything in my LPAE branch, just posted an > alternative fix-up for the nopud patch. Please _state_ clearly whether > you consider my original (in the LPAE series) fixup valid or not. If > yes, I'm happy that I don't have to rework anything. Oh for god sake. I think I've already stated very clearly what I want. I see no reason to repeat myself yet again.