On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 15:00:56 PST (-0800), t...@linutronix.de wrote:
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 02:20:12 PST (-0800), t...@linutronix.de wrote:
> This looks sensible. We have two options for getting this merged:
> 1)   I'll take the whole lot through tip/irq/core
> 2)   I'll apply patch 1/N to a special branch in tip. That branch will
> contain
>      only this commit on top of 4.16-rc4 and can be pulled by the relevant
>      architecture maintainers, so they can apply their architecture specific
>      patches.

Option 1 seems like the lowest overhead, as that way we don't need to sequence
the patches between multiple trees.  If all the other arch maintianers are OK
with it then that works for me.

Ok, I wait for someone to yell NO until tuesday. If that doesn't happen I
pick it up.

The 0-day robot found a new build warning on openrisc.  I was plannning
on submitting a v4 with this fix in it

   diff --git a/arch/openrisc/include/asm/irq.h
   index d9eee0a2b7b4..eb612b1865d2 100644
   --- a/arch/openrisc/include/asm/irq.h
   +++ b/arch/openrisc/include/asm/irq.h
   @@ -24,6 +24,4 @@
       #define NO_IRQ         (-1)
      -extern void set_handle_irq(void (*handle_irq)(struct pt_regs *));
    #endif /* __ASM_OPENRISC_IRQ_H__ */

I can submit a v4, or you can just grab it from

Just reply on the v3 openrisc patch with a v4 and I grab it from there.

OK, I just did -- sorry it took a while, I had to prepare for the ELC

Reply via email to