[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Nicolas Ferre]

Arnd, Olof, Kevin,

Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
available in early 3.17 merge window.
So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
- we are very early in 3.17 development
- it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
  of the merge window
- it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
  aic5 driver
- we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
- the code is basically moved so it should be error free.

I base my pull-request on Linus' tree at the point you built your previous
"3.17 fixes-for-linus" tag.
Tell me if you think it can be integrated now.

Thanks, best regards,

The following changes since commit c309bfa9b481e7dbd3e1ab819271bf3009f44859:

  Merge tag 'for-linus-20140808' of git://git.infradead.org/linux-mtd (2014-08-08 18:13:21 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:


  git://github.com/at91linux/linux-at91.git tags/at91-fixes

for you to fetch changes up to 98561f0d9e82682c4be74b6690cb605ccabec364:

  ARM: at91: remove old irq material (2014-08-14 17:00:04 +0200)

----------------------------------------------------------------
AT91 irqchip enhancement for 3.17 (aka fixes #1)
Following the merge of AIC/AIC5 code as standard irqchip drivers during early
3.17 merge window, we can use these drivers for AT91 DT-enabled chips and
boards.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Boris BREZILLON (4):
      ARM: at91: introduce OLD_IRQ_AT91 Kconfig option
      ARM: at91: enclose at91_aic_xx calls in IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OLD_IRQ_AT91) blocks
      ARM: at91: make use of the new AIC driver for dt enabled boards
      ARM: at91: remove old irq material

 arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig           |  17 +--
 arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig.non_dt    |   6 +
 arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile          |   3 +-
 arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt-rm9200.c |  13 --
 arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt-sam9.c   |  13 --
 arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt-sama5.c  |  13 --
 arch/arm/mach-at91/irq.c             | 270 +----------------------------------
 arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c              |  32 +++--
 arch/arm/mach-at91/setup.c           |   3 +-
 9 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 325 deletions(-)

-- 
Nicolas Ferre

[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Jason Cooper]

Nicolas,

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
> 
> Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
> directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
> use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
> available in early 3.17 merge window.
> So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
> - we are very early in 3.17 development
> - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
>   of the merge window

Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on?

  git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic

> - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
>   aic5 driver
> - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
> - the code is basically moved so it should be error free.

Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit
unusual.  You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window
that has had _no_ time in -next...  Sounds like a recipe for trouble to
me.

In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic
branch.

thx,

Jason.

[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Boris BREZILLON]

Hi Jason,

On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:22:25 -0400
Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote:

> Nicolas,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> > Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
> > 
> > Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
> > directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
> > use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
> > available in early 3.17 merge window.
> > So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
> > - we are very early in 3.17 development
> > - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
> >   of the merge window
> 
> Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on?
> 
>   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic

Don't blame Nicolas for this, he was in vacation when you created this
branch (he came back this week), and I should have told you that he
couldn't use it for this release cycle.

> 
> > - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
> >   aic5 driver
> > - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
> > - the code is basically moved so it should be error free.
> 
> Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit
> unusual.  You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window
> that has had _no_ time in -next...  Sounds like a recipe for trouble to
> me.
> 
> In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic
> branch.

This is all my fault, I'm the one who asked Nicolas to get these patches
merged in 3.17, and, as I said, I should have told you that he was in
vacation and thus could not use your topic branch for this release
cycle.

Anyway, I understand your concern about merging stuff that have not been
tested on linux-next.

Arnd, Olof, Kevin, I'd totally understand if you refuses to takes these
patches for this release cycle.

Best Regards,

Boris


-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Jason Cooper]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 04:41:50PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:22:25 -0400 Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> > > Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
> > > 
> > > Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
> > > directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
> > > use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
> > > available in early 3.17 merge window.
> > > So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
> > > - we are very early in 3.17 development
> > > - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
> > >   of the merge window
> > 
> > Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on?
> > 
> >   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic
> 
> Don't blame Nicolas for this, he was in vacation when you created this
> branch (he came back this week), and I should have told you that he
> couldn't use it for this release cycle.

'Blame' is too strong a word. :)  It was more of a friendly, "wtf?"  I
guess I could have worded it better...

> > > - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
> > >   aic5 driver
> > > - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
> > > - the code is basically moved so it should be error free.
> > 
> > Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit
> > unusual.  You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window
> > that has had _no_ time in -next...  Sounds like a recipe for trouble to
> > me.
> > 
> > In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic
> > branch.
> 
> This is all my fault, I'm the one who asked Nicolas to get these patches
> merged in 3.17, and, as I said, I should have told you that he was in
> vacation and thus could not use your topic branch for this release
> cycle.

Ah, no problem.  If there was nothing exciting going on in the SoC
directory, I probably could have kept the whole series together in one
branch with just an Ack.  But that's water under the bridge now.

We'll see what arm-soc says, but I suspect it's going to be wait for the
next window...

thx,

Jason.

[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Nicolas Ferre]

On 15/08/2014 17:05, Jason Cooper :
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 04:41:50PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:22:25 -0400 Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>>>> Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
>>>>
>>>> Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
>>>> directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
>>>> use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
>>>> available in early 3.17 merge window.
>>>> So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
>>>> - we are very early in 3.17 development
>>>> - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
>>>>   of the merge window
>>>
>>> Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on?
>>>
>>>   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic
>>
>> Don't blame Nicolas for this, he was in vacation when you created this
>> branch (he came back this week), and I should have told you that he
>> couldn't use it for this release cycle.
> 
> 'Blame' is too strong a word. :)  It was more of a friendly, "wtf?"  I
> guess I could have worded it better...
> 
>>>> - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
>>>>   aic5 driver
>>>> - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
>>>> - the code is basically moved so it should be error free.
>>>
>>> Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit
>>> unusual.  You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window
>>> that has had _no_ time in -next...  Sounds like a recipe for trouble to
>>> me.
>>>
>>> In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic
>>> branch.
>>
>> This is all my fault, I'm the one who asked Nicolas to get these patches
>> merged in 3.17, and, as I said, I should have told you that he was in
>> vacation and thus could not use your topic branch for this release
>> cycle.
> 
> Ah, no problem.  If there was nothing exciting going on in the SoC
> directory, I probably could have kept the whole series together in one
> branch with just an Ack.  But that's water under the bridge now.
> 
> We'll see what arm-soc says, but I suspect it's going to be wait for the
> next window...

Jason,

(back in the game, recovering an Internet access in Chicago)

Yes, bad timing for this material indeed but I tried to explain lengthy
what to expect from these patches, what was the at91 irqchip drivers
situation in 3.17 and, I believe, not pushing arm-soc guys at all.

So, for sure I tried something a little bit weird I admit, and well, now
I am happily to re-purpose this for 3.18. There is absolutely no problem
to wait a little bit more on my side.

Anyway, thanks for your help with the review and your topic branch.

Bye,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre

[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Olof Johansson]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Boris BREZILLON
<boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:22:25 -0400
> Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net> wrote:
>
>> Nicolas,
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>> > Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
>> >
>> > Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
>> > directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
>> > use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
>> > available in early 3.17 merge window.
>> > So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
>> > - we are very early in 3.17 development
>> > - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
>> >   of the merge window
>>
>> Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on?
>>
>>   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic
>
> Don't blame Nicolas for this, he was in vacation when you created this
> branch (he came back this week), and I should have told you that he
> couldn't use it for this release cycle.
>
>>
>> > - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
>> >   aic5 driver
>> > - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
>> > - the code is basically moved so it should be error free.
>>
>> Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit
>> unusual.  You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window
>> that has had _no_ time in -next...  Sounds like a recipe for trouble to
>> me.
>>
>> In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic
>> branch.
>
> This is all my fault, I'm the one who asked Nicolas to get these patches
> merged in 3.17, and, as I said, I should have told you that he was in
> vacation and thus could not use your topic branch for this release
> cycle.
>
> Anyway, I understand your concern about merging stuff that have not been
> tested on linux-next.
>
> Arnd, Olof, Kevin, I'd totally understand if you refuses to takes these
> patches for this release cycle.

Yeah, this isn't 3.17 material at this time -- the merge window is
practically over. We'll be happy to queue it for 3.18 starting next
week.


-Olof