Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Russell King]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 01:27:45PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Russell,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.c between commit
> 2817142f31bfbf26c216bf4f9192540c81b2d071 ("[WATCHDOG] omap_wdt.c: sync
> linux-omap changes") from Linus' tree and commit
> cc26b3b01bc96a8b8c36671b0dc4898b2a152ea8 ("ARM: OMAP3: Add minimal
> omap3430 support") from the arm tree.
> 
> The former removed code that the latter modified.  I fixed it up
> by just removing the section of code as the former patch seems to take
> account of what the latter is trying to do (but it may not be correct).
> You can fix it by merging Linus' tree and doing this or a similar (maybe
> correct) fixup.

This sounds very messy.  I suspect I need Tony to look at that and
tell me what the right solution is.  However...

Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
fixing those, I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can
at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
dropping the new OMAP3 support.

That would include dropping the above commit causing the merge conflict.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[David Brownell]

On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Russell King wrote:
> Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
> missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
> fixing those,

Probably has to do with his travel plans, which he mentioned
last week (Thursday?).  I think he's back online in the next
day or two.


> I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can 
> at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
> dropping the new OMAP3 support.

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree

[Tony Lindgren]

* David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> [081014 11:53]:
> On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Russell King wrote:
> > Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
> > missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
> > fixing those,

I just sent you a fix for that few hours ago.

> Probably has to do with his travel plans, which he mentioned
> last week (Thursday?).  I think he's back online in the next
> day or two.
> 
> 
> > I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can 
> > at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
> > dropping the new OMAP3 support.

Yes, I'm back online. And please don't drop these patches, sounds
like this is a trivial merge issue.

Regards,

Tony

[PATCH] ARM: OMAP: Revert omap3 WDT changes to avoid merge conflict (Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree)

[Tony Lindgren]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 967 bytes --]

* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [081014 13:09]:
> * David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> [081014 11:53]:
> > On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Russell King wrote:
> > > Since the OMAP updates I merged from Tony are already broken due to
> > > missing definitions, and I'm not getting any response from Tony on
> > > fixing those,
> 
> I just sent you a fix for that few hours ago.
> 
> > Probably has to do with his travel plans, which he mentioned
> > last week (Thursday?).  I think he's back online in the next
> > day or two.
> > 
> > 
> > > I will be dropping the problematical updates so we can 
> > > at least keep mainline OMAP in a buildable state.  That seems to mean
> > > dropping the new OMAP3 support.
> 
> Yes, I'm back online. And please don't drop these patches, sounds
> like this is a trivial merge issue.

And here's the patch for Russell to avoid the merge conflict.
Also in Russell's patch tracking system as patch 5302/1.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tony

[-- Attachment #2: wdt.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 894 bytes --]

From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:25:20 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: Revert omap3 WDT changes to avoid merge conflict

With the upcoming WDT patches OMAP_WDT_BASE is no longer needed
in devices.c. Revert some earlier omap3 changes to avoid merge
conflicts with the WDT patches.

Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>

--- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.c
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/devices.c
@@ -399,17 +399,8 @@ static inline void omap_init_uwire(void) {}
 
 #if	defined(CONFIG_OMAP_WATCHDOG) || defined(CONFIG_OMAP_WATCHDOG_MODULE)
 
-#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP34XX)
-#define	OMAP_WDT_BASE		0x48314000
-#elif defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP24XX)
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2430
-/* WDT2 */
-#define	OMAP_WDT_BASE		0x49016000
-#else
+#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP24XX
 #define	OMAP_WDT_BASE		0x48022000
-#endif
-
 #else
 #define	OMAP_WDT_BASE		0xfffeb000
 #endif

Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: Revert omap3 WDT changes to avoid merge conflict (Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree)

[Russell King]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 01:30:24PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> And here's the patch for Russell to avoid the merge conflict.
> Also in Russell's patch tracking system as patch 5302/1.

This evening, only now having the time to investigate what's going
on there (as a result of added your other patch to fix the build
error I reported on Saturday) it turns out to be much more trivial
a conflict than I was suspecting from sfr's description.

However, the results of the final merge with 'master' on my devel
branch never go to Linus, so your patch may still be required.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of: