linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Liam,

Today's linux-next merge of the voltage tree got a conflict in
drivers/regulator/Makefile between commit
b07682b6056eb6701f8cb86aa5800e6f2ea7919b ("mfd: Rename twl4030* driver
files to enable re-use") from Linus' tree and commit
9c4d460f13b7d81abb26449a3920638889a3e5ed ("regulator: add driver for
MAX8660/8661") from the voltage tree.

Just context changes.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix
for a while.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc drivers/regulator/Makefile
index 9ae3cc4,2cf98a7..0000000
--- a/drivers/regulator/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/regulator/Makefile
@@@ -11,7 -11,8 +11,8 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_USERSPACE_CONSUM
  obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_BQ24022) += bq24022.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_LP3971) += lp3971.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX1586) += max1586.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_MAX8660) += max8660.o
 -obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_TWL4030) += twl4030-regulator.o
 +obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_TWL4030) += twl-regulator.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM831X) += wm831x-dcdc.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM831X) += wm831x-isink.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM831X) += wm831x-ldo.o

linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 948 bytes --]

Hi Liam,

Today's linux-next merge of the voltage tree got a conflict in
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c between commit
441a450554dada1c59fc06fdf068cb0eeba53c6d ("regulator: Add support for
twl6030 regulators") from Linus' tree and commits
6360cf42ae51be5f6e6e72d6e81f202d9db0f7e9 ("twl4030-regulator: Remove
regulator from all groups when disabling") and
3277b9fce0fcaa68d5947429e062163852ebc6fb ("twl4030-regulator: Add all TWL
regulators to twreg_info") from the voltage tree.

I cannot begin to fix this mess up.  I do wonder why the regulator patch
above was never in linux-next before being sent upstream yesterday
(Samuel?).  All I can do is use the version of the voltage tree from
next-20091120 (commit id b0a7a2ad0aebb35934de6d2509c73fe93a362c0e) for
today and hope that Liam can do the merge with Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

[Liam Girdwood]

Hi Stephen,

On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 13:38 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Liam,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the voltage tree got a conflict in
> drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c between commit
> 441a450554dada1c59fc06fdf068cb0eeba53c6d ("regulator: Add support for
> twl6030 regulators") from Linus' tree and commits
> 6360cf42ae51be5f6e6e72d6e81f202d9db0f7e9 ("twl4030-regulator: Remove
> regulator from all groups when disabling") and
> 3277b9fce0fcaa68d5947429e062163852ebc6fb ("twl4030-regulator: Add all TWL
> regulators to twreg_info") from the voltage tree.
> 
> I cannot begin to fix this mess up.  I do wonder why the regulator patch
> above was never in linux-next before being sent upstream yesterday
> (Samuel?).  All I can do is use the version of the voltage tree from
> next-20091120 (commit id b0a7a2ad0aebb35934de6d2509c73fe93a362c0e) for
> today and hope that Liam can do the merge with Linus' tree.
> 

Sorry about this. There were some large patch sets that did span both
mfd and regulator recently.

I'll fix and do my pull request today.

Liam

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

[Liam Girdwood]

On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 09:48 +0000, Liam Girdwood wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 13:38 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Liam,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the voltage tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c between commit
> > 441a450554dada1c59fc06fdf068cb0eeba53c6d ("regulator: Add support for
> > twl6030 regulators") from Linus' tree and commits
> > 6360cf42ae51be5f6e6e72d6e81f202d9db0f7e9 ("twl4030-regulator: Remove
> > regulator from all groups when disabling") and
> > 3277b9fce0fcaa68d5947429e062163852ebc6fb ("twl4030-regulator: Add all TWL
> > regulators to twreg_info") from the voltage tree.
> > 
> > I cannot begin to fix this mess up.  I do wonder why the regulator patch
> > above was never in linux-next before being sent upstream yesterday
> > (Samuel?).  All I can do is use the version of the voltage tree from
> > next-20091120 (commit id b0a7a2ad0aebb35934de6d2509c73fe93a362c0e) for
> > today and hope that Liam can do the merge with Linus' tree.
> > 
> 
> Sorry about this. There were some large patch sets that did span both
> mfd and regulator recently.
> 
> I'll fix and do my pull request today.

Peter, Juha,

I've fixed up regulator for-next against upstream and now get a build
failure on twl-regulator.c (possibly related to mfd/twl-codec.c build
failure today ?)

  CC      drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.o
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c: In function ‘twlreg_disable’:
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:158: error: ‘P1_GRP’ undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:158: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:158: error: for each function it appears in.)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:158: error: ‘P2_GRP’ undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:158: error: ‘P3_GRP’ undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c: At top level:
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:358: error: ‘twlldo_list_voltage’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:450:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:450: error: ‘TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:451:40: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:452:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:453:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:454:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:455:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:456:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:457:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:458:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:459:34: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:460:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:461:40: error: macro "TWL_FIXED_LDO" requires 5 arguments, but only 4 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:461: error: ‘TWL_FIXED_LDO’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:462:39: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:463:39: error: macro "TWL_FIXED_LDO" requires 5 arguments, but only 4 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:464:34: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:465:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:466:35: error: macro "TWL_ADJUSTABLE_LDO" requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:467:39: error: macro "TWL_FIXED_LDO" requires 5 arguments, but only 4 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:468:39: error: macro "TWL_FIXED_LDO" requires 5 arguments, but only 4 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:469:39: error: macro "TWL_FIXED_LDO" requires 5 arguments, but only 4 given
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: error: ‘VAUX1_6030_VSEL_table’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:474: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: error: ‘VAUX2_6030_VSEL_table’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:475: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: error: ‘VAUX3_6030_VSEL_table’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:476: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: error: ‘VMMC_VSEL_table’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:477: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: error: ‘VPP_VSEL_table’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:478: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: error: ‘VUSIM_VSEL_table’ undeclared here (not in a function)
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: warning: type defaults to ‘int’ in declaration of ‘type name’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:479: error: negative width in bit-field ‘<anonymous>’
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c: In function ‘twlreg_probe’:
drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c:544: error: implicit declaration of function ‘twl4030reg_write’
make[2]: *** [drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [drivers/regulator] Error 2
make: *** [drivers] Error 2

Can you check this and send me patch before I issue a pull request.
Fwiw, the regulator pull request is now blocking on this issue.

Thanks.

Liam

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

[Juha Keski-Saari]

On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 13:14 +0100, ext Liam Girdwood wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 09:48 +0000, Liam Girdwood wrote:
> > Hi Stephen,
> > 
> > On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 13:38 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Liam,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the voltage tree got a conflict in
> > > drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c between commit
> > > 441a450554dada1c59fc06fdf068cb0eeba53c6d ("regulator: Add support for
> > > twl6030 regulators") from Linus' tree and commits
> > > 6360cf42ae51be5f6e6e72d6e81f202d9db0f7e9 ("twl4030-regulator: Remove
> > > regulator from all groups when disabling") and
> > > 3277b9fce0fcaa68d5947429e062163852ebc6fb ("twl4030-regulator: Add all TWL
> > > regulators to twreg_info") from the voltage tree.
> > > 
> > > I cannot begin to fix this mess up.  I do wonder why the regulator patch
> > > above was never in linux-next before being sent upstream yesterday
> > > (Samuel?).  All I can do is use the version of the voltage tree from
> > > next-20091120 (commit id b0a7a2ad0aebb35934de6d2509c73fe93a362c0e) for
> > > today and hope that Liam can do the merge with Linus' tree.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sorry about this. There were some large patch sets that did span both
> > mfd and regulator recently.
> > 
> > I'll fix and do my pull request today.
> 
> Peter, Juha,
> 
> I've fixed up regulator for-next against upstream and now get a build
> failure on twl-regulator.c (possibly related to mfd/twl-codec.c build
> failure today ?)
> Can you check this and send me patch before I issue a pull request.
> Fwiw, the regulator pull request is now blocking on this issue.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Liam

Hi Liam

I should be able to fix at the very least most of those during tomorrow,
it appears that some changes with the 6030 additions confused the
patches I sent to you earlier. I'll send you a patch tomorrows

Best regards,
Juha K-S

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the voltage tree with Linus' tree

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Hello Liam,

On Tuesday 15 December 2009 14:14:02 ext Liam Girdwood wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 09:48 +0000, Liam Girdwood wrote:
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 13:38 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Liam,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the voltage tree got a conflict in
> > > drivers/regulator/twl-regulator.c between commit
> > > 441a450554dada1c59fc06fdf068cb0eeba53c6d ("regulator: Add support for
> > > twl6030 regulators") from Linus' tree and commits
> > > 6360cf42ae51be5f6e6e72d6e81f202d9db0f7e9 ("twl4030-regulator: Remove
> > > regulator from all groups when disabling") and
> > > 3277b9fce0fcaa68d5947429e062163852ebc6fb ("twl4030-regulator: Add all
> > > TWL regulators to twreg_info") from the voltage tree.
> > >
> > > I cannot begin to fix this mess up.  I do wonder why the regulator
> > > patch above was never in linux-next before being sent upstream
> > > yesterday (Samuel?).  All I can do is use the version of the voltage
> > > tree from next-20091120 (commit id
> > > b0a7a2ad0aebb35934de6d2509c73fe93a362c0e) for today and hope that Liam
> > > can do the merge with Linus' tree.
> >
> > Sorry about this. There were some large patch sets that did span both
> > mfd and regulator recently.
> >
> > I'll fix and do my pull request today.
> 
> Peter, Juha,
> 
> I've fixed up regulator for-next against upstream and now get a build
> failure on twl-regulator.c (possibly related to mfd/twl-codec.c build
> failure today ?)

I think this is not related to twl403-codec.c (or twl-codec.c, if it has been 
changed as well).
It looks like the twl6030 changes went in quite an un-organized way, which is 
causing lots of problems all over the place...

...

> 
> Can you check this and send me patch before I issue a pull request.
> Fwiw, the regulator pull request is now blocking on this issue.

I need to find the series for the twl6030, and check the soc codec driver as 
well, if it is still in a working shape.

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Liam
> 

-- 
Péter