[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPfQW-9m7a5S8oRy7dpHLOodvVq44vHV=wVnG8WjOeP_EA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 12:33:16 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@...dia.com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] clk: tegra: Fix duplicate const for parent names
2015-04-09 12:19 GMT+02:00 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 12:07:59PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> 2015-04-09 12:00 GMT+02:00 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>:
>> > On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 03:22:15PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> >> Replace duplicated const keyword for 'emc_parent_clk_names' with proper
>> >> array of const pointers to const strings.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
>> >> ---
>> >> drivers/clk/tegra/clk-emc.c | 2 +-
>> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > This would probably better go in via the Tegra tree since the patch that
>> > contains this has only made it to linux-next.
>> >
>> > Stephen, Mike, any objections to me taking this?
>>
>> Applying this without the change for const-ness of parent_names (patch
>> by Sascha Hauer sent before mine [1]) would introduce a warning -
>> assign of const to non-const. Any idea to solve it? Immutable branch?
>
> Right, I had missed that. Immutable branch would work, though perhaps
> it'd be easier to just defer this until after v4.1-rc1. The warning
> shouldn't happen if we leave out this single patch and apply it later
> on, right?
That would be fine with me. I think it would better to apply patches
now if they are applicable.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists