linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree

linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1228 bytes --]

Hi Henrik,

Today's linux-next merge of the input-mt tree got a conflict in
drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c between commit 9b7e31bbf4bb
("Input: request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT") from the
input-current tree and commit c2ef9a1a248b ("Input: atmel_mxt_ts - use
client name for irq") from the input-mt tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
index 25fd056,37190ab..0000000
--- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
+++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
@@@ -1144,13 -1167,8 +1167,9 @@@ static int __devinit mxt_probe(struct i
  	input_set_drvdata(input_dev, data);
  	i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
  
- 	error = mxt_initialize(data);
- 	if (error)
- 		goto err_free_object;
- 
  	error = request_threaded_irq(client->irq, NULL, mxt_interrupt,
 -			pdata->irqflags, client->name, data);
 +				     pdata->irqflags | IRQF_ONESHOT,
- 				     client->dev.driver->name, data);
++				     client->name, data);
  	if (error) {
  		dev_err(&client->dev, "Failed to register interrupt\n");
  		goto err_free_object;

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree

[Daniel Kurtz]

On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Henrik,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the input-mt tree got a conflict in
> drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c between commit 9b7e31bbf4bb
> ("Input: request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT") from the
> input-current tree and commit c2ef9a1a248b ("Input: atmel_mxt_ts - use
> client name for irq") from the input-mt tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.

Looks good to me. Don't know if you need it for a merge, but:

Reviewed-by: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>


> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
>
> diff --cc drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
> index 25fd056,37190ab..0000000
> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
> @@@ -1144,13 -1167,8 +1167,9 @@@ static int __devinit mxt_probe(struct i
>         input_set_drvdata(input_dev, data);
>         i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
>
> -       error = mxt_initialize(data);
> -       if (error)
> -               goto err_free_object;
> -
>         error = request_threaded_irq(client->irq, NULL, mxt_interrupt,
>  -                      pdata->irqflags, client->name, data);
>  +                                   pdata->irqflags | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> -                                    client->dev.driver->name, data);
> ++                                   client->name, data);
>         if (error) {
>                 dev_err(&client->dev, "Failed to register interrupt\n");
>                 goto err_free_object;

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree

[Dmitry Torokhov]

Hi Henrik,

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:57:14AM +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > Hi Henrik,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the input-mt tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c between commit 9b7e31bbf4bb
> > ("Input: request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT") from the
> > input-current tree and commit c2ef9a1a248b ("Input: atmel_mxt_ts - use
> > client name for irq") from the input-mt tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> 
> Looks good to me. Don't know if you need it for a merge, but:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>
> 

Hmm, maybe it is time I pull your tree?

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree

[Henrik Rydberg]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 10:19:05AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Henrik,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:57:14AM +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > Hi Henrik,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the input-mt tree got a conflict in
> > > drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c between commit 9b7e31bbf4bb
> > > ("Input: request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT") from the
> > > input-current tree and commit c2ef9a1a248b ("Input: atmel_mxt_ts - use
> > > client name for irq") from the input-mt tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> > 
> > Looks good to me. Don't know if you need it for a merge, but:
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>
> > 
> 
> Hmm, maybe it is time I pull your tree?

By all means, I have nothing further planned for the merge window. I
wanted to wait until Linus pulls your current tree, then pull in the
merge conflict, then eventual reverts, then send you a pull
request. IOW, something like tomorrow. Sounds good?

Henrik

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 07:57:23PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 10:19:05AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Henrik,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:57:14AM +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > > Hi Henrik,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the input-mt tree got a conflict in
> > > > drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c between commit 9b7e31bbf4bb
> > > > ("Input: request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT") from the
> > > > input-current tree and commit c2ef9a1a248b ("Input: atmel_mxt_ts - use
> > > > client name for irq") from the input-mt tree.
> > > >
> > > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> > > 
> > > Looks good to me. Don't know if you need it for a merge, but:
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>
> > > 
> > 
> > Hmm, maybe it is time I pull your tree?
> 
> By all means, I have nothing further planned for the merge window. I
> wanted to wait until Linus pulls your current tree, then pull in the
> merge conflict, then eventual reverts, then send you a pull
> request. IOW, something like tomorrow. Sounds good?

You do not need to wait for Linus to pull and push: I will merge my
for-linus branch into next and pull and resolve your changes and then
git magic should take care of the rest.

So just send me a pull request.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry