[PATCH 8/9] pinctrl: abx500: Rejiggle platform data and DT initialisation

[linus.walleij@linaro.org (Linus Walleij)]

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 May 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> > A pointer to GPIO platform data is always passed to the driver now, so
>> > there's little point in checking for 'pdata' and executing the DT case if
>> > it's not there. The difference between booting with DT and !DT is when
>> > booting with DT, plat_id is not populated. Thus, in the DT case we have
>> > to use a DT match table in order to find out which platform we're
>> > executing on. So, we're changing the semantics here to only use the
>> > match table if no plat_id is supplied though platform data.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>>
>> Is this really included in the [0/9] fire alarm wrapper statement
>> "Important ux500 fixups due for the v3.10 -rc:s"?
>>
>> It seems more like a random refactoring to me.
>>
>> The commit message fails to specify which regression this
>> is fixing, like if it's causing an oops or so.
>>
>> So I've tentatively applied it to the pinctrl devel branch for
>> v3.11 unless something comes up...
>
> Perhaps the commit message is a bit weak, but yes, it _needs_ to go
> into v3.10, or this driver will be _broken_ when we boot with DT.
>
> Please apply this to your -fixes branch.

Quting myself from above:
  "The commit message fails to specify which regression this
  is fixing, like if it's causing an oops or so."

I'm happy to apply it but what do I write in the commit message?

Yours,
Linus Walleij