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