[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160518040943.GO1256@tuxbot>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 21:09:43 -0700
From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, arnd@...db.de,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, andy.gross@...aro.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, olof@...om.net
Subject: Re: QRTR merge conflict resolution
On Tue 17 May 17:43 PDT 2016, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Tue, 17 May 2016 14:11:54 -0400 (EDT) David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> >
> > From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> > Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 15:19:09 -0700
> >
> > > I have prepared the merge of net-next and the conflicting tag from the
> > > Qualcomm SOC, please include this in your pull towards Linus to avoid
> > > the merge conflict.
> >
> > Pulled, thanks.
>
> Except in the merge resolution, the 2 new functions added to
> include/linux/soc/qcom/smd.h (qcom_smd_get_drvdata and
> qcom_smd_set_drvdata) were not marked "static inline" :-(
>
How silly of me to miss that, sorry about that.
I didn't spot this in my compile testing either, because this is the
only driver in the tree including that file that doesn't depend on
QCOM_SMD.
As there is no immediate problem with moving forward I suggest that I'll
fix this, through arm-soc, once the code has landed.
Regards,
Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists