| Message ID | 26e401ce30cc$602e45f0$208ad1d0$%kim@samsung.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote: >> could you amend the patches that adds them such as they get changed >> into "select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB" instead? You can grep for "select > > I can do it for my tree but the branch already included in arm-soc tree so I think, it should be fixed with another patch. And > >> GENERIC_GPIO" in arch/arm to find the offending lines. We are removing >> GENERIC_GPIO and this work cannot be merged until you do this since it >> would break ARM builds. Thanks! >> > So how about following? If you are OK, let me take into samsung tree. > > --------8<----------------8<-------- > From: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> > Subject: [PATCH] ARM: SAMSUNG: change GENERIC_GPIO to ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB > > When I applied regarding samsung-time patches, the "select GENERIC_GPIO" > has been added wrong, so this patch fixes that. > And since the GENERIC_GPIO in arch/arm/ will be gone away, this adds > ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB for S3C24XX and S5PC100 instead. > > Reported-by: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> > Cc: Romain Naour <romain.naour@openwide.fr> > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> > --- > arch/arm/Kconfig | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig > index 46fcfa8..a239c7e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig > @@ -770,10 +770,10 @@ config ARCH_SA1100 > config ARCH_S3C24XX > bool "Samsung S3C24XX SoCs" > select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ > + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB > select CLKDEV_LOOKUP > select CLKSRC_MMIO > select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS > - select GENERIC_GPIO > select HAVE_CLK > select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C > select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG > @@ -828,11 +828,11 @@ config ARCH_S5P64X0 > > config ARCH_S5PC100 > bool "Samsung S5PC100" > + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB > select CLKDEV_LOOKUP > select CLKSRC_MMIO > select CPU_V7 > select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS > - select GENERIC_GPIO > select HAVE_CLK > select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C > select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG > -- > 1.7.10.4 Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged prior to my patches. Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? Thanks! Alex. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Alexandre Courbot wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote: > >> could you amend the patches that adds them such as they get changed > >> into "select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB" instead? You can grep for "select > > > > I can do it for my tree but the branch already included in arm-soc tree > so I think, it should be fixed with another patch. And > > > >> GENERIC_GPIO" in arch/arm to find the offending lines. We are removing > >> GENERIC_GPIO and this work cannot be merged until you do this since it > >> would break ARM builds. Thanks! > >> > > So how about following? If you are OK, let me take into samsung tree. > > > > --------8<----------------8<-------- > > From: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> > > Subject: [PATCH] ARM: SAMSUNG: change GENERIC_GPIO to > ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB > > > > When I applied regarding samsung-time patches, the "select GENERIC_GPIO" > > has been added wrong, so this patch fixes that. > > And since the GENERIC_GPIO in arch/arm/ will be gone away, this adds > > ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB for S3C24XX and S5PC100 instead. > > > > Reported-by: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> > > Cc: Romain Naour <romain.naour@openwide.fr> > > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig > > index 46fcfa8..a239c7e 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig > > @@ -770,10 +770,10 @@ config ARCH_SA1100 > > config ARCH_S3C24XX > > bool "Samsung S3C24XX SoCs" > > select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ > > + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB > > select CLKDEV_LOOKUP > > select CLKSRC_MMIO > > select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS > > - select GENERIC_GPIO > > select HAVE_CLK > > select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C > > select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG > > @@ -828,11 +828,11 @@ config ARCH_S5P64X0 > > > > config ARCH_S5PC100 > > bool "Samsung S5PC100" > > + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB > > select CLKDEV_LOOKUP > > select CLKSRC_MMIO > > select CPU_V7 > > select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS > > - select GENERIC_GPIO > > select HAVE_CLK > > select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C > > select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG > > -- > > 1.7.10.4 > > Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged > prior to my patches. I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into mainline before others... > Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? > I did, so it should be fine. Thanks. - Kukjin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 04/08/2013 01:31 AM, Kukjin Kim wrote: > Alexandre Courbot wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote: >>>> could you amend the patches that adds them such as they get changed >>>> into "select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB" instead? You can grep for "select >>> >>> I can do it for my tree but the branch already included in arm-soc tree >> so I think, it should be fixed with another patch. And >>> >>>> GENERIC_GPIO" in arch/arm to find the offending lines. We are removing >>>> GENERIC_GPIO and this work cannot be merged until you do this since it >>>> would break ARM builds. Thanks! >>>> >>> So how about following? If you are OK, let me take into samsung tree. >>> >>> --------8<----------------8<-------- >>> From: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> >>> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: SAMSUNG: change GENERIC_GPIO to >> ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB >>> >>> When I applied regarding samsung-time patches, the "select GENERIC_GPIO" >>> has been added wrong, so this patch fixes that. >>> And since the GENERIC_GPIO in arch/arm/ will be gone away, this adds >>> ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB for S3C24XX and S5PC100 instead. >>> >>> Reported-by: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> >>> Cc: Romain Naour <romain.naour@openwide.fr> >>> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/Kconfig | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig >>> index 46fcfa8..a239c7e 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig >>> +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig >>> @@ -770,10 +770,10 @@ config ARCH_SA1100 >>> config ARCH_S3C24XX >>> bool "Samsung S3C24XX SoCs" >>> select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ >>> + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB >>> select CLKDEV_LOOKUP >>> select CLKSRC_MMIO >>> select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS >>> - select GENERIC_GPIO >>> select HAVE_CLK >>> select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C >>> select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG >>> @@ -828,11 +828,11 @@ config ARCH_S5P64X0 >>> >>> config ARCH_S5PC100 >>> bool "Samsung S5PC100" >>> + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB >>> select CLKDEV_LOOKUP >>> select CLKSRC_MMIO >>> select CPU_V7 >>> select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS >>> - select GENERIC_GPIO >>> select HAVE_CLK >>> select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C >>> select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG >>> -- >>> 1.7.10.4 >> >> Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged >> prior to my patches. > > I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into mainline before others... > >> Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? >> > I did, so it should be fine. > > Thanks. > > - Kukjin You may want to discuss how to handle this dependency with the arm-soc maintainers (CC'd). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Monday 08 April 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> > >> Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged > >> prior to my patches. > > > > I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into mainline before others... > > > >> Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? > >> > > I did, so it should be fine. > > > > You may want to discuss how to handle this dependency with the arm-soc > maintainers (CC'd). I'm fine with putting the same branch into arm-soc as well as the gpio tree and anything else that might need it, that tends to be the least invasive way. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi all, On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 21:36:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > On Monday 08 April 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > > >> > > >> Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged > > >> prior to my patches. > > > > > > I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into mainline before others... > > > > > >> Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? > > >> > > > I did, so it should be fine. > > > > > > > You may want to discuss how to handle this dependency with the arm-soc > > maintainers (CC'd). > > I'm fine with putting the same branch into arm-soc as well as the gpio tree > and anything else that might need it, that tends to be the least invasive > way. Just a reminder: that had better be the exact same branch and that branch had better never be rebased/rewritten ...
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > Hi all, > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 21:36:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: >> >> On Monday 08 April 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged >> > >> prior to my patches. >> > > >> > > I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into mainline before others... >> > > >> > >> Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? >> > >> >> > > I did, so it should be fine. >> > > >> > >> > You may want to discuss how to handle this dependency with the arm-soc >> > maintainers (CC'd). >> >> I'm fine with putting the same branch into arm-soc as well as the gpio tree >> and anything else that might need it, that tends to be the least invasive >> way. > > Just a reminder: that had better be the exact same branch and that branch > had better never be rebased/rewritten ... Sorry, which branch are we talking about - is it the one I published for -next initially? If so wouldn't it be simpler to withdraw it and have Grant integrate the patches in his branch? Since no one depends on them for now anyway... I remember rebasing it once some time ago to add Acked-bys, but it hasn't changed since then. Alex. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi, On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 17:07:54 -0700 Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 21:36:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > >> > >> On Monday 08 April 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is merged > >> > >> prior to my patches. > >> > > > >> > > I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into mainline before others... > >> > > > >> > >> Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? > >> > >> > >> > > I did, so it should be fine. > >> > > > >> > > >> > You may want to discuss how to handle this dependency with the arm-soc > >> > maintainers (CC'd). > >> > >> I'm fine with putting the same branch into arm-soc as well as the gpio tree > >> and anything else that might need it, that tends to be the least invasive > >> way. > > > > Just a reminder: that had better be the exact same branch and that branch > > had better never be rebased/rewritten ... > > Sorry, which branch are we talking about - is it the one I published > for -next initially? If so wouldn't it be simpler to withdraw it and > have Grant integrate the patches in his branch? Since no one depends > on them for now anyway... > > I remember rebasing it once some time ago to add Acked-bys, but it > hasn't changed since then. I am talking about the branch that Arnd says should be merged into both the arm-soc and gpio trees.
Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 17:07:54 -0700 Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 21:36:44 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > >> > > >> On Monday 08 April 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Should do the trick, if we can make sure that your tree is > merged > > >> > >> prior to my patches. > > >> > > > > >> > > I'm not sure but I think, arm-soc tree should be merged into > mainline before others... > > >> > > > > >> > >> Can you put it into your tree for 3.10? > > >> > >> > > >> > > I did, so it should be fine. > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > You may want to discuss how to handle this dependency with the arm- > soc > > >> > maintainers (CC'd). > > >> > > >> I'm fine with putting the same branch into arm-soc as well as the > gpio tree > > >> and anything else that might need it, that tends to be the least > invasive > > >> way. > > > > > > Just a reminder: that had better be the exact same branch and that > branch > > > had better never be rebased/rewritten ... > > > > Sorry, which branch are we talking about - is it the one I published > > for -next initially? If so wouldn't it be simpler to withdraw it and > > have Grant integrate the patches in his branch? Since no one depends > > on them for now anyway... > > > > I remember rebasing it once some time ago to add Acked-bys, but it > > hasn't changed since then. > > I am talking about the branch that Arnd says should be merged into both > the arm-soc and gpio trees. > Well, AFAIK, the problem including "select GENERIC_GPIO" happened only in samsung tree so arm-soc tree is enough. If any problems, please let me know. Arnd, just note, the fix is included in my pull-request [09/10]. Thanks. - Kukjin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig index 46fcfa8..a239c7e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig @@ -770,10 +770,10 @@ config ARCH_SA1100 config ARCH_S3C24XX bool "Samsung S3C24XX SoCs" select ARCH_HAS_CPUFREQ + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB select CLKDEV_LOOKUP select CLKSRC_MMIO select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS - select GENERIC_GPIO select HAVE_CLK select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG @@ -828,11 +828,11 @@ config ARCH_S5P64X0 config ARCH_S5PC100 bool "Samsung S5PC100" + select ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB select CLKDEV_LOOKUP select CLKSRC_MMIO select CPU_V7 select GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS - select GENERIC_GPIO select HAVE_CLK select HAVE_S3C2410_I2C if I2C select HAVE_S3C2410_WATCHDOG if WATCHDOG