From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones) Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 12:19:03 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 6.2/7] MMC: mmci: Enable Device Tree support for ux500 In-Reply-To: References: <1334325909-5779-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1334325909-5779-7-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <4F8BE5B0.4000900@linaro.org> <20120425185747.GC24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA29E46.6040204@linaro.org> <20120503151253.GE897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA2A4A8.9010208@linaro.org> <20120503163008.GF897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA2B4A3.2040402@linaro.org> <20120503164501.GG897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <8762cdur7o.fsf@laptop.org> <4FA3D720.7010004@linaro.org> <87mx5ot6vp.fsf@laptop.org> <4FA3DC27.6030204@linaro.org> Message-ID: <4FA90127.1050107@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/05/12 23:00, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Lee Jones wrote: >> On 04/05/12 14:26, Chris Ball wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Fri, May 04 2012, Lee Jones wrote: >>>> >>>> I can either do that, or push it through Arnd's tree if you like (and >>>> it's okay with him), as I will be supplying him with another pull >>>> request after my next patch-set has been scrutinised. Would that suit >>>> you better? >>> >>> >>> If the MMC patches are self-contained and it doesn't break anything to > > Hi All, > > The version of these patches that just appeared in linux-next is causing > build fails on about 5 different configs (versatile_defconfig etc). > > It isn't hard to see (with hindsight) that the new function is declared in > an #ifdef CONFIG_OF block, but it's callers are not similarly guarded. > So you get things like this: > > http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/6272348/ > > If you can get a fixed up version into the linux-next queue ASAP, that > would be great. I've fixed the issue. How would you like the fix? As a fix patch, or a replacement for the broken one? Kind regards, Lee >>> merge them separately, my preference is to merge them via the MMC tree >>> (to avoid creating conflicts against other MMC patches in there). >>> >>> If there are dependencies, going via Arnd instead is fine. >> >> >> Okay, I'll knock up a small patch-set and send it to you. >> >> I think it's 3 patches.