From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756088AbYEUE0k (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 00:26:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751078AbYEUE0b (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 00:26:31 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:42951 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751007AbYEUE0a (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 00:26:30 -0400 From: Rusty Russell To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/57] iTCO: unlocked_ioctl, coding style and cleanup Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:26:15 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wim@iguana.be, Stephen Rothwell References: <20080519124659.31722.51847.stgit@core> <20080519130625.31722.68489.stgit@core> <20080520012658.274b0c1e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080520012658.274b0c1e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200805211426.16234.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 20 May 2008 18:26:58 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:06:25 +0100 Alan Cox wrote: > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_vendor.h | 15 ++ > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_vendor_support.c | 53 +++--- > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c | 294 > > ++++++++++++++++---------------- > > This runs afoul of git-watchdog and/or itco_wdt-ich9do-support.patch > > Hunk #1 succeeded at 66 (offset 1 line). > Hunk #3 FAILED at 139. > Hunk #4 FAILED at 158. > Hunk #5 FAILED at 201. > Hunk #6 FAILED at 222. > Hunk #7 FAILED at 246. > Hunk #8 succeeded at 374 (offset 12 lines). > Hunk #9 FAILED at 429. > Hunk #10 FAILED at 458. > Hunk #11 FAILED at 472. > Hunk #12 FAILED at 480. > Hunk #13 FAILED at 489. > Hunk #14 FAILED at 518. > Hunk #15 FAILED at 534. > Hunk #16 FAILED at 588. > Hunk #17 succeeded at 454 (offset -140 lines). > Hunk #18 FAILED at 475. > Hunk #19 succeeded at 669 (offset 27 lines). > Hunk #20 succeeded at 512 (offset -140 lines). > Hunk #21 FAILED at 534. > Hunk #22 succeeded at 814 (offset 29 lines). > 15 out of 22 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c.rej > > so I ducked this one. > > booke-watchdog-clean-up-and-unlocked_ioctl gets 8-out-of-ten against > watchdog-fix-booke_wdtc-on-mpc85xx-smp-system.patch so I ducked that one > too. > > w83697hf_wdt-cleanup-coding-style-and-switch-to-unlocked_ioctl gets > 4-of-17 against git-watchdog - also ducked. > > > The rest applied, although about half of them needed fixes because > Rusty has been running around fiddling with other peoples stuff > renaming down_trylock to down_nowait all over the tree. > > This means that the watchdog patches now have a Rusty dependency so I > NEED TO KNOW if those patches aren't for 2.6.27 or if they get nacked > or something. > > It also means that the patches which I queued cannot go into Wim's tree > as-is. If Wim queues the originals then it means that Stephen and/or > myself get to fix all the rejects again, and there'll be a > decent-sized smashup during the merge window. There are lessons > here... I've been pulling out s/down_trylock/down_nowait/ patches which effect others' changes. Those patches get moved to the end of my queue, and I'll revisit them before an actual merge with Linus. As down_trylock still works (but marked deprecated) with my patches, they're fine to drop. Just tell me which ones... Hope that helps, Rusty.