| Message ID | 1356650452-16559-2-git-send-email-linux@prisktech.co.nz (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 12:20 +1300, Tony Prisk wrote: > This patch adds support for the WM8750 (ARMv6) and WM8850 (ARMv7). > > Common features across all SoCs are split into ARCH_VT8500 and > unique features are specified by each SoC option. > > Signed-off-by: Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz> Hi Arnd, Olof, Haven't heard anything re: this patch series. Problem? Regards Tony P
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz> wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 12:20 +1300, Tony Prisk wrote: >> This patch adds support for the WM8750 (ARMv6) and WM8850 (ARMv7). >> >> Common features across all SoCs are split into ARCH_VT8500 and >> unique features are specified by each SoC option. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz> > > > Hi Arnd, Olof, > > Haven't heard anything re: this patch series. Problem? Nope, just wasn't sure if you would send a git pull request or if you wanted them applied. I'm out of time for tonight, but I'll look closer at them (and apply them if all OK) tomorrow. -Olof
On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 22:30 -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz> wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 12:20 +1300, Tony Prisk wrote: > >> This patch adds support for the WM8750 (ARMv6) and WM8850 (ARMv7). > >> > >> Common features across all SoCs are split into ARCH_VT8500 and > >> unique features are specified by each SoC option. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz> > > > > > > Hi Arnd, Olof, > > > > Haven't heard anything re: this patch series. Problem? > > Nope, just wasn't sure if you would send a git pull request or if you > wanted them applied. > > I'm out of time for tonight, but I'll look closer at them (and apply > them if all OK) tomorrow. > > > -Olof I'm quite happy to send a pull request if that's what you prefer. Generally people have just taken the patches straight from email, so everytime I've done a pull-request I get a reply back saying the patches have already been applied. Is there some 'rule' around pull-requests vs emailed patches? Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? Regards Tony P
On Wednesday 09 January 2013, Tony Prisk wrote: > I'm quite happy to send a pull request if that's what you prefer. > > Generally people have just taken the patches straight from email, so > everytime I've done a pull-request I get a reply back saying the patches > have already been applied. > > Is there some 'rule' around pull-requests vs emailed patches? Generally, pull requests tend to be less work for us, so I prefer them. In particular, when you add a tag description or a signed tag, that gives automatically puts nice text into the merge changeset. > Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? Yes. Arnd
On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 21:27 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 09 January 2013, Tony Prisk wrote: > > I'm quite happy to send a pull request if that's what you prefer. > > > > Generally people have just taken the patches straight from email, so > > everytime I've done a pull-request I get a reply back saying the patches > > have already been applied. > > > > Is there some 'rule' around pull-requests vs emailed patches? > > Generally, pull requests tend to be less work for us, so I prefer > them. In particular, when you add a tag description or a signed > tag, that gives automatically puts nice text into the merge > changeset. > > > Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? > > Yes. > > Arnd This is what I thought - and the reason I haven't sent a pull-request for the patch's - I haven't had any Ack's :) Regards Tony P
On Thursday 10 January 2013, Tony Prisk wrote: > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 21:27 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? > > This is what I thought - and the reason I haven't sent a pull-request > for the patch's - I haven't had any Ack's :) > Sorry, I think I misunderstood the question then. I meant that if you received an Acked-by statement, it should be part of the changeset comment by the time you send a pull request. There is also the rule that patches need to be reviewed on the mailing list before you submit them for inclusion. Like all rules, this can be bent a little for patches that are obvious correct bug fixes, especially when you are the platform maintainer. What you can do here is send the patches out to the mailing list without any additional Acks and send the pull request as the [PATCH 0/X] mail. We can then look at the patches if necessary or just pull in the branch straight away. Arnd
On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 10:21 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 10 January 2013, Tony Prisk wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 21:27 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > Should patches in pull-requests have Ack'd lines already? > > > > This is what I thought - and the reason I haven't sent a pull-request > > for the patch's - I haven't had any Ack's :) > > > > Sorry, I think I misunderstood the question then. I meant that if > you received an Acked-by statement, it should be part of the > changeset comment by the time you send a pull request. > > There is also the rule that patches need to be reviewed on the > mailing list before you submit them for inclusion. Like all > rules, this can be bent a little for patches that are obvious > correct bug fixes, especially when you are the platform > maintainer. What you can do here is send the patches out to the > mailing list without any additional Acks and send the pull > request as the [PATCH 0/X] mail. We can then look at the > patches if necessary or just pull in the branch straight away. > > Arnd > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel All makes sense now - thanks. Regards Tony P
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/vt8500.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/vt8500.txt index d657832..87dc1dd 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/vt8500.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/vt8500.txt @@ -12,3 +12,11 @@ compatible = "wm,wm8505"; Boards with the Wondermedia WM8650 SoC shall have the following properties: Required root node property: compatible = "wm,wm8650"; + +Boards with the Wondermedia WM8750 SoC shall have the following properties: +Required root node property: +compatible = "wm,wm8750"; + +Boards with the Wondermedia WM8850 SoC shall have the following properties: +Required root node property: +compatible = "wm,wm8850"; diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig index f95ba14..fbb9492 100644 --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig @@ -952,20 +952,25 @@ config ARCH_OMAP config ARCH_VT8500_SINGLE bool "VIA/WonderMedia 85xx" - select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ - select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB - select CLKDEV_LOOKUP + select ARCH_VT8500 select COMMON_CLK select CPU_ARM926T - select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS - select GENERIC_GPIO - select HAVE_CLK select MULTI_IRQ_HANDLER select SPARSE_IRQ select USE_OF help Support for VIA/WonderMedia VT8500/WM85xx System-on-Chip. +config ARCH_WM8750_SINGLE + bool "WonderMedia WM8750/WM8850" + select ARCH_VT8500 + select COMMON_CLK + select MULTI_IRQ_HANDLER + select SPARSE_IRQ + select USE_OF + help + Support for WonderMedia WM8750/WM8850 System-on-Chip. + endchoice menu "Multiple platform selection" diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig index 2ed0b7d..d67c7fa 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig @@ -1,12 +1,39 @@ config ARCH_VT8500 - bool "VIA/WonderMedia 85xx" if ARCH_MULTI_V5 - default ARCH_VT8500_SINGLE + bool select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB select CLKDEV_LOOKUP - select CPU_ARM926T select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS select GENERIC_GPIO select HAVE_CLK + +config ARCH_WM8505 + bool "VIA/WonderMedia 85xx" if !ARCH_VT8500_SINGLE + depends on ARCH_MULTI_V5 + default ARCH_VT8500_SINGLE + select ARCH_VT8500 + select CPU_ARM926T help Support for VIA/WonderMedia VT8500/WM85xx System-on-Chip. + +config ARCH_WM8750 + bool "WonderMedia WM8750" + depends on ARCH_MULTI_V6 || ARCH_WM8750_SINGLE + select ARCH_VT8500 + select CPU_V6 + help + Support for WonderMedia WM8750 System-on-Chip. + +config ARCH_WM8850 + bool "WonderMedia WM8850" + depends on ARCH_MULTI_V7 || ARCH_WM8750_SINGLE + select ARCH_VT8500 + select CPU_V7 + help + Support for WonderMedia WM8850 System-on-Chip. + +# ensure that ARCH_WM8850 is on if ARCH_WM8750 is off +config ARCH_WM8850_AUTO + def_bool y + depends on ARCH_WM8750_SINGLE && !ARCH_WM8750 + select ARCH_WM8850 diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/vt8500.c b/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/vt8500.c index 3c66d48..55162ab 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/vt8500.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-vt8500/vt8500.c @@ -183,6 +183,8 @@ static const char * const vt8500_dt_compat[] = { "via,vt8500", "wm,wm8650", "wm,wm8505", + "wm,wm8750", + "wm,wm8850", }; DT_MACHINE_START(WMT_DT, "VIA/Wondermedia SoC (Device Tree Support)")
This patch adds support for the WM8750 (ARMv6) and WM8850 (ARMv7). Common features across all SoCs are split into ARCH_VT8500 and unique features are specified by each SoC option. Signed-off-by: Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/vt8500.txt | 8 ++++++ arch/arm/Kconfig | 17 +++++++---- arch/arm/mach-vt8500/Kconfig | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++-- arch/arm/mach-vt8500/vt8500.c | 2 ++ 4 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)