linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with the i.MX 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]

Message-ID: <37329.84.56.74.117.1299048219.squirrel@protonic.xs4all.nl>
Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2011 07:43:39 +0100 (CET)
From:	david@...tonic.nl
To:	"Andres Salomon" <dilinger@...ued.net>
Cc:	"David Jander" <david.jander@...tonic.nl>,
	"Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	"Samuel Ortiz" <sameo@...ux.intel.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "David Jander" <david@...tonic.nl>,
	"Sascha Hauer" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with the i.MX tree

> On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:35:28 +0100
> David Jander <david.jander@...tonic.nl> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:54:36 +1100
>> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the mfd tree got a conflict in
>> > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx27_3ds.c arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pcm038.c
>> > arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31_3ds.c
>> > arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31moboard.c between commit
>> > 5836372e8a0ba5cc633f61bc0484ee20c86f4b36 ("ARM: imx+mx3: convert to
>> > mc13xxx MFD") from the i.MX tree and commit
>> > e84e545d47d26644275a79fe5ebc1797bcb80910 ("mfd: mfd_cell is now
>> > implicitly available to mc13xxx drivers") from the mfd tree.
>> >
>> > I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as
>> > necessary.
>>
>> Your fix seems correct, although I fear I am too dumb to understand
>> why commit e84e545d47d26644275a79fe5ebc1797bcb80910 introduces this
>> extra struct nesting.... AFAICS gcc will end up doing the same as
>> without the extra nest.
>
> It was requested in this thread:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/551441/

Ah, ok. I thought this change was somehow necessary for your patch to
work. I would have expected a separate patch otherwise.

Best regards,

-- 
David Jander


--
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/