From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0406542CB17 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2026 09:32:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787823160; cv=none; b=jmhlbn8/1d7fc7BoF2SEbH5202YHSWWSPM2JZgi9ztf5A+gEpcjN1tbQwVzFRr5/QMLGlwIoRGAO3Q8LflAze4jGajD3G/qrpei8rvmiGKQvs/ikHYT2lk5F8tek6bJarvjuogf12ayXX3fIagG9xYImnRN95fmq53BOBUksZVc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787823160; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/jQKC5c4QuzmnMd3rNtZOojeHxgRfSkVz0sN1uXukLQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Z2a/VMvL6xxZygJCbq0nii5yJFmi+ZTNiq+PdPEU8fjZRs3zUr6lSa/JXGp4IoOv7aVBGY23HVDGAzNbd8zPJX6R3jtD7krfIF/dH7hdIsY1hgEb7wRWP02PM3H6b7CnRHpx2QPuPey+NJyOxKHyP2oCSlJmMr2EcCmK+A4RIkA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=vN/VHaNX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="vN/VHaNX" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7739E1691; Thu, 27 Aug 2026 02:32:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.33.8.86] (unknown [10.33.8.86]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4B40A3F66F; Thu, 27 Aug 2026 02:32:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1787823142; bh=/jQKC5c4QuzmnMd3rNtZOojeHxgRfSkVz0sN1uXukLQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=vN/VHaNXhp4COXH68SRPu1t14JLKJWmIksxvptxoITc63AX6/9o8C1I8RzbOXxBU7 bFP7dPxNiuO2OtNsNolpSPxJOFCrOAcPZrjjtB3XKe6XRb3lYWLLtGxOybCmtDhRZH fC/BLYwfHXaEXOmEIELKMdkt7EqTIz40hayPwKvY= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2026 10:32:19 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] pinctrl: sunxi: Allwinner A733 support To: Vinicius Pedrosa Cc: Linus Walleij , Chen-Yu Tsai , Samuel Holland , Jernej Skrabec , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <20250821004232.8134-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20260826230720.466026-1-vinicius.eduardo.pedrosa@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Andre Przywara In-Reply-To: <20260826230720.466026-1-vinicius.eduardo.pedrosa@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, On 8/27/26 01:07, Vinicius Pedrosa wrote: > Hi Andre, > > This series no longer applies to mainline. Patch 1/9 fails on current Yes, naturally, this series is quite old, and we had some changes and fixes in pinctrl meanwhile. I didn't find time in the last cycles, but will send an update *after* -rc1 is released. So just a bit more patience ... Cheers, Andre P.S. What was the particular purpose of you sending this email? I can't help to feel this is AI generated, isn't it? But the breakage is obvious, and as you can imagine I am well aware of my patch having been merged, and other patches in the vicinity which I authored or reviewed conflicting. In fact I regularly rebase my branches on every -rc1, I just didn't get around to send a new version. > master (45c13f3f9e3b), for two separate reasons - one of them from > outside the series, which is why I am reporting it rather than just > fixing it locally. > > Applying the series in order: > > [RFC PATCH 1/9] pinctrl: sunxi: rename SUNXI_PINCTRL_NEW_REG_LAYOUT > error: patch failed: drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c:1521 > error: patch failed: drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.h:88 > > The blocking one is your own patch 2/9. It merged as 42e06688c6cb > ("pinctrl: sunxi: pass down flags to pinctrl routines") without 1/9, so > sunxi_pinctrl_init_with_flags() now reads > > pctl->flags = flags; > > where 1/9 still expects > > pctl->variant = flags & SUNXI_PINCTRL_VARIANT_MASK; > > as context. A 3-way merge does not resolve it - both sides touch > adjacent lines, so it conflicts. > > The second is unrelated to your work. 70f8915ea4e9 ("pinctrl: sunxi: fix > gpiochip_lock_as_irq() failure when pinmux is unknown") inserted > SUN4I_FUNC_DISABLED_OLD/NEW into 1/9's header hunk context, and added a > fifth use of SUNXI_PINCTRL_NEW_REG_LAYOUT, in > sunxi_pinctrl_irq_request_resources(). The header hunk merges cleanly > with -3, but that new use is not covered by the rename, so the tree then > fails to build with an undeclared identifier. > > Patches 3/9 through 9/9 apply cleanly once 1/9 is resolved. > > Static reproduction only - no A733 hardware here, so nothing in this > message says anything about whether the series works. I am not sending a > rebase: which shape 1/9 should take now that 2/9 is in is your call. > > Vinicius