linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the gpio tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:15:18 -0800
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@...com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the gpio tree

* Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> [120301 03:57]:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got conflicts in
> > arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c between commit ab985f0f7c2c ("gpio/omap:
> > cleanup omap_gpio_mod_init function") from the gpio tree and commit
> > 63325ff235de ("ARM: OMAP1: Move 16xx GPIO system clock to platform init
> > code") from the arm-soc tree.
> > 
> > OK, I can't decide which is correct here - the former adds this code
> > inside the loop (even though it seems to not depend on anything in the
> > loop) and the latter adds it before.  I have used the former (but am
> > happy to be corrected).  And both commits remove the code in
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c.
> 
> Right, having the code outside of the loop seems correct to me, too.
> 
> Grant, I would suggest that I resolve this by merging the the
> omap/gpio/runtime-pm-cleanup branch (f86bcc3) that is in your
> tree into the arm-soc tree as a dependency for the omap1 stuff,
> with the resolution below.

For gpio16xx.c the resolution is to use the version from ab985f0f7c2c,
so below looks good to me.

Regards,

Tony


> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap1/gpio16xx.c
> @@@ -218,17 -225,34 +225,34 @@@ static int __init omap16xx_gpio_init(vo
>   	if (!cpu_is_omap16xx())
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
>  +	/*
>  +	 * Enable system clock for GPIO module.
>  +	 * The CAM_CLK_CTRL *is* really the right place.
>  +	 */
>  +	omap_writel(omap_readl(ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL) | 0x04,
>  +					ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL);
>  +
> - 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev); i++)
> - 		platform_device_register(omap16xx_gpio_dev[i]);
> + 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev); i++) {
> + 		pdev = omap16xx_gpio_dev[i];
> + 		pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> + 
> + 		res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + 		if (unlikely(!res)) {
> + 			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid mem resource.\n");
> + 			return -ENODEV;
> + 		}
>   
> - 	gpio_bank_count = ARRAY_SIZE(omap16xx_gpio_dev);
> + 		base = ioremap(res->start, resource_size(res));
> + 		if (unlikely(!base)) {
> + 			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "ioremap failed.\n");
> + 			return -ENOMEM;
> + 		}
> + 
> + 		__raw_writel(SYSCONFIG_WORD, base + OMAP1610_GPIO_SYSCONFIG);
> + 		iounmap(base);
> + 
>  -		/*
>  -		 * Enable system clock for GPIO module.
>  -		 * The CAM_CLK_CTRL *is* really the right place.
>  -		 */
>  -		omap_writel(omap_readl(ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL) | 0x04,
>  -					ULPD_CAM_CLK_CTRL);
>  -
> + 		platform_device_register(omap16xx_gpio_dev[i]);
> + 	}
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/