Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Saturday 07 March 2015 03:12:12 dwal...@fifo99.com wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform > > support. In combination with the other patches that are now > > at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git > > multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other > > developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all > > ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. > > > > Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, > > it was more work to get to this point than the others, and > > some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. > > Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement > > over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one > > merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. > > > > Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on > > a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some > > of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we > > can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. > > > > Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not > > been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, > > but I'm also very interested in people testing it. > > > > I think I would support deleting mach-msm at this point. I did work > on adding device tree support last year, but lost my motivation. It > seems like the community has a tendency to attack things that > are "old" and mach-msm seems like a constant whipping horse. I don't > have plans for mach-msm., Qualcomm never cared about the remaining platforms > and Google never cared either. I have no reason to care about it anymore. > > If someone out there still wants the code I'm game to start actively > maintaining > it, now that it's clear David and Bryan have completely walked away. Baring > someone > coming forward it seems no one else is actively using it. I'd like to first get my patch series merged and have that in the kernel for one release, so we can start with this as a base if we decide to revive it. I'm definitely fine with removing it in the following merge window, but I'd leave that up to you. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Saturday 07 March 2015 03:12:12 dwal...@fifo99.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform support. In combination with the other patches that are now at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, it was more work to get to this point than the others, and some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, but I'm also very interested in people testing it. I think I would support deleting mach-msm at this point. I did work on adding device tree support last year, but lost my motivation. It seems like the community has a tendency to attack things that are old and mach-msm seems like a constant whipping horse. I don't have plans for mach-msm., Qualcomm never cared about the remaining platforms and Google never cared either. I have no reason to care about it anymore. If someone out there still wants the code I'm game to start actively maintaining it, now that it's clear David and Bryan have completely walked away. Baring someone coming forward it seems no one else is actively using it. I'd like to first get my patch series merged and have that in the kernel for one release, so we can start with this as a base if we decide to revive it. I'm definitely fine with removing it in the following merge window, but I'd leave that up to you. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Thursday 05 March 2015 17:40:18 Ulf Hansson wrote: > The goal from my side is to entirely remove this mmc driver and > instead convert to use the mmci host driver. > > If I understand correctly, the current big blocker to reach that goal > is the DMA driver, since it's not converted to the DMA engine API? Do > you know if that's a correct statement? Yes, I think that is correct. As I wrote in the patch description, after we remove the serial-hs driver, msm_sdcc is the only user of the private MSM DMA API. I wasn't aware that this device is compatible with mmci, but that certainly simplifies things. > Anyway, I suppose this patchset can be considered as step in the right > direction, even if I don't like to take patches for the msm_sdcc.c. Ok. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Thursday 05 March 2015 17:40:18 Ulf Hansson wrote: The goal from my side is to entirely remove this mmc driver and instead convert to use the mmci host driver. If I understand correctly, the current big blocker to reach that goal is the DMA driver, since it's not converted to the DMA engine API? Do you know if that's a correct statement? Yes, I think that is correct. As I wrote in the patch description, after we remove the serial-hs driver, msm_sdcc is the only user of the private MSM DMA API. I wasn't aware that this device is compatible with mmci, but that certainly simplifies things. Anyway, I suppose this patchset can be considered as step in the right direction, even if I don't like to take patches for the msm_sdcc.c. Ok. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform > support. In combination with the other patches that are now > at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git > multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other > developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all > ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. > > Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, > it was more work to get to this point than the others, and > some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. > Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement > over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one > merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. > > Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on > a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some > of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we > can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. > > Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not > been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, > but I'm also very interested in people testing it. > I think I would support deleting mach-msm at this point. I did work on adding device tree support last year, but lost my motivation. It seems like the community has a tendency to attack things that are "old" and mach-msm seems like a constant whipping horse. I don't have plans for mach-msm., Qualcomm never cared about the remaining platforms and Google never cared either. I have no reason to care about it anymore. If someone out there still wants the code I'm game to start actively maintaining it, now that it's clear David and Bryan have completely walked away. Baring someone coming forward it seems no one else is actively using it. Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform support. In combination with the other patches that are now at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, it was more work to get to this point than the others, and some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, but I'm also very interested in people testing it. I think I would support deleting mach-msm at this point. I did work on adding device tree support last year, but lost my motivation. It seems like the community has a tendency to attack things that are old and mach-msm seems like a constant whipping horse. I don't have plans for mach-msm., Qualcomm never cared about the remaining platforms and Google never cared either. I have no reason to care about it anymore. If someone out there still wants the code I'm game to start actively maintaining it, now that it's clear David and Bryan have completely walked away. Baring someone coming forward it seems no one else is actively using it. Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On 4 March 2015 at 20:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform
> support. In combination with the other patches that are now
> at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git
> multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other
> developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all
> ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux.
>
> Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years,
> it was more work to get to this point than the others, and
> some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution.
> Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement
> over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one
> merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones.
>
> Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on
> a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some
> of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we
> can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1.
>
> Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not
> been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC,
> but I'm also very interested in people testing it.
>
> Arnd
>
> Arnd Bergmann (18):
> serial: remove obsolete msm_serial_hs driver
> mmc: msm: move data mover into mmc driver
> mmc: msm: pass dmov resources via device
> mmc: msm: move clk-reset logic to platform
> ARM: msm: fix qsd8x50 rev.a support
> ARM: msm: fix mach/msm_iomap.h inclusions
> ARM: msm: fix sirc code for multiplatform
> ARM: msm: fix gpiomux config for multiplatform
> ARM: msm: fix vic irqchip for multiplatform
> gpio: move msm-v1 driver to mach-msm
> clocksource: qcom: make mach-msm and mach-qcom coexist
> ARM: msm: make smd behave like a normal driver
> ARM: msm: rename conflicting symbols
> ARM: msm: pass gpio irq range as resource
> ARM: msm: clean up irq handling
> ARM: msm: make msm_smd.h global
> ARM: msm: make all header files local
> ARM: msm: enable multiplatform support
>
> arch/arm/Kconfig | 12 -
> arch/arm/configs/msm_defconfig |7 +
> arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig | 91 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/Makefile | 11 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-halibut.c | 31 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-msm7x30.c | 98 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-qsd8x50.c | 138 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-gpio.c |7 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-mmc.c| 33 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-panel.c |8 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.c| 26 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.h|2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/clk.h |0
> arch/arm/mach-msm/clock-pcom.c |5 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.c |2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.h |2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/common.h | 16 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x00.c| 169 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x30.c| 78 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-qsd8x50.c| 152 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/devices.h| 67 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/dma.c| 298
> {drivers/gpio => arch/arm/mach-msm}/gpio-msm-v1.c | 33 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-8x50.c |2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-v1.h |9 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.c| 18 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.h| 10 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/dma.h | 151 --
> arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/entry-macro.S | 36 -
> arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/hardware.h | 18 -
> arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/irqs.h | 37 -
> arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/sirc.h | 98 -
> arch/arm/mach-msm/io.c | 161 --
> arch/arm/mach-msm/irq-vic.c| 146 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/irq.c| 29 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/irqs-7x00.h |3 +
> arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/irqs-7x30.h |2 +
> arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/irqs-8x50.h | 42 +
> arch/arm/mach-msm/last_radio_log.c |1 -
> arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_gpiomux.h |0
> .../mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap-7x00.h |5 +-
> .../mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap-7x30.h |2 -
> .../mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap-8x50.h | 12 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap.h | 24 +-
> arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.c | 12 +-
>
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On 4 March 2015 at 20:32, Arnd Bergmann a...@arndb.de wrote:
This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform
support. In combination with the other patches that are now
at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git
multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other
developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all
ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux.
Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years,
it was more work to get to this point than the others, and
some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution.
Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement
over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one
merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones.
Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on
a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some
of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we
can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1.
Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not
been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC,
but I'm also very interested in people testing it.
Arnd
Arnd Bergmann (18):
serial: remove obsolete msm_serial_hs driver
mmc: msm: move data mover into mmc driver
mmc: msm: pass dmov resources via device
mmc: msm: move clk-reset logic to platform
ARM: msm: fix qsd8x50 rev.a support
ARM: msm: fix mach/msm_iomap.h inclusions
ARM: msm: fix sirc code for multiplatform
ARM: msm: fix gpiomux config for multiplatform
ARM: msm: fix vic irqchip for multiplatform
gpio: move msm-v1 driver to mach-msm
clocksource: qcom: make mach-msm and mach-qcom coexist
ARM: msm: make smd behave like a normal driver
ARM: msm: rename conflicting symbols
ARM: msm: pass gpio irq range as resource
ARM: msm: clean up irq handling
ARM: msm: make msm_smd.h global
ARM: msm: make all header files local
ARM: msm: enable multiplatform support
arch/arm/Kconfig | 12 -
arch/arm/configs/msm_defconfig |7 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig | 91 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/Makefile | 11 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-halibut.c | 31 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-msm7x30.c | 98 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-qsd8x50.c | 138 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-gpio.c |7 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-mmc.c| 33 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-panel.c |8 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.c| 26 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.h|2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/clk.h |0
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock-pcom.c |5 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.c |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.h |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/common.h | 16 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x00.c| 169 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x30.c| 78 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-qsd8x50.c| 152 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices.h| 67 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/dma.c| 298
{drivers/gpio = arch/arm/mach-msm}/gpio-msm-v1.c | 33 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-8x50.c |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-v1.h |9 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.c| 18 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.h| 10 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/dma.h | 151 --
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/entry-macro.S | 36 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/hardware.h | 18 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/irqs.h | 37 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/sirc.h | 98 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/io.c | 161 --
arch/arm/mach-msm/irq-vic.c| 146 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/irq.c| 29 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/irqs-7x00.h |3 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/irqs-7x30.h |2 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/irqs-8x50.h | 42 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/last_radio_log.c |1 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_gpiomux.h |0
.../mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap-7x00.h |5 +-
.../mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap-7x30.h |2 -
.../mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap-8x50.h | 12 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap.h | 24 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.c | 12 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.h |2 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/sirc.c
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wednesday 04 March 2015 22:11:41 dwal...@fifo99.com wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform > > support. In combination with the other patches that are now > > at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git > > multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other > > developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all > > ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. > > > > Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, > > it was more work to get to this point than the others, and > > some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. > > Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement > > over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one > > merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. > > > > Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on > > a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some > > of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we > > can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. > > > > Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not > > been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, > > but I'm also very interested in people testing it. > > Didn't look at it in great detail (I will eventually), but it looks like your > just > cleaning things up .. Is that accurate ? Yes: if I did everything right, there should be no functional changes. Most of the work was converting compile-time conditionals into runtime conditionals, to ensure that things work when we enable all options at once. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform > support. In combination with the other patches that are now > at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git > multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other > developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all > ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. > > Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, > it was more work to get to this point than the others, and > some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. > Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement > over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one > merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. > > Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on > a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some > of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we > can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. > > Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not > been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, > but I'm also very interested in people testing it. Didn't look at it in great detail (I will eventually), but it looks like your just cleaning things up .. Is that accurate ? Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
Paul Bolle schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 22:09 [+0100]: > [Added Michal and kbuild.] That I planned to do before deleting most of my draft. I should have deleted that line too. Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
[Added Michal and kbuild.] Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 21:35 [+0100]: > On Wednesday 04 March 2015 21:31:32 Paul Bolle wrote: > > Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]: > > > arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +- > > > > Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the > > build system _at all_. It never has been (see > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the > > submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory > > serves me right. > > > > I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have > > to bother you now if I would have used such language last year. > > I noticed this, but since it was not standing in the way of what I tried > to do, I did not do anything about it here. > > > You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your > > time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do > > you prefer to fold such a patch into this series? > > The patch would be appreciated, but I'd keep it separate from this series. > I saw a lot of things in need of cleanup in the files I touched here, > but refused the temptation, in order to get something done and not > start something controversial. I'll resubmit my trivial patch once this series hits linux-next. Feel free to prod me if I forget. Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wednesday 04 March 2015 21:31:32 Paul Bolle wrote: > Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]: > > arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +- > > Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the > build system _at all_. It never has been (see > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the > submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory > serves me right. > > I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have > to bother you now if I would have used such language last year. I noticed this, but since it was not standing in the way of what I tried to do, I did not do anything about it here. > You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your > time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do > you prefer to fold such a patch into this series? The patch would be appreciated, but I'd keep it separate from this series. I saw a lot of things in need of cleanup in the files I touched here, but refused the temptation, in order to get something done and not start something controversial. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]: > arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +- Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the build system _at all_. It never has been (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory serves me right. I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have to bother you now if I would have used such language last year. You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do you prefer to fold such a patch into this series? Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform
support. In combination with the other patches that are now
at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git
multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other
developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all
ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux.
Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years,
it was more work to get to this point than the others, and
some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution.
Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement
over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one
merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones.
Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on
a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some
of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we
can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1.
Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not
been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC,
but I'm also very interested in people testing it.
Arnd
Arnd Bergmann (18):
serial: remove obsolete msm_serial_hs driver
mmc: msm: move data mover into mmc driver
mmc: msm: pass dmov resources via device
mmc: msm: move clk-reset logic to platform
ARM: msm: fix qsd8x50 rev.a support
ARM: msm: fix mach/msm_iomap.h inclusions
ARM: msm: fix sirc code for multiplatform
ARM: msm: fix gpiomux config for multiplatform
ARM: msm: fix vic irqchip for multiplatform
gpio: move msm-v1 driver to mach-msm
clocksource: qcom: make mach-msm and mach-qcom coexist
ARM: msm: make smd behave like a normal driver
ARM: msm: rename conflicting symbols
ARM: msm: pass gpio irq range as resource
ARM: msm: clean up irq handling
ARM: msm: make msm_smd.h global
ARM: msm: make all header files local
ARM: msm: enable multiplatform support
arch/arm/Kconfig | 12 -
arch/arm/configs/msm_defconfig |7 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig | 91 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/Makefile | 11 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-halibut.c | 31 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-msm7x30.c | 98 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-qsd8x50.c | 138 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-gpio.c |7 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-mmc.c| 33 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-panel.c |8 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.c| 26 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.h|2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/clk.h |0
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock-pcom.c |5 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.c |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.h |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/common.h | 16 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x00.c| 169 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x30.c| 78 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-qsd8x50.c| 152 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices.h| 67 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/dma.c| 298
{drivers/gpio => arch/arm/mach-msm}/gpio-msm-v1.c | 33 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-8x50.c |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-v1.h |9 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.c| 18 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.h| 10 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/dma.h | 151 --
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/entry-macro.S | 36 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/hardware.h | 18 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/irqs.h | 37 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/sirc.h | 98 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/io.c | 161 --
arch/arm/mach-msm/irq-vic.c| 146 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/irq.c| 29 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/irqs-7x00.h |3 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/irqs-7x30.h |2 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/irqs-8x50.h | 42 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/last_radio_log.c |1 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_gpiomux.h |0
.../mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap-7x00.h |5 +-
.../mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap-7x30.h |2 -
.../mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap-8x50.h | 12 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach => }/msm_iomap.h | 24 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.c | 12 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.h |2 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/sirc.c | 44 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/sirc.h | 34 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/smd.c|
[RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform
support. In combination with the other patches that are now
at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git
multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other
developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all
ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux.
Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years,
it was more work to get to this point than the others, and
some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution.
Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement
over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one
merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones.
Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on
a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some
of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we
can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1.
Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not
been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC,
but I'm also very interested in people testing it.
Arnd
Arnd Bergmann (18):
serial: remove obsolete msm_serial_hs driver
mmc: msm: move data mover into mmc driver
mmc: msm: pass dmov resources via device
mmc: msm: move clk-reset logic to platform
ARM: msm: fix qsd8x50 rev.a support
ARM: msm: fix mach/msm_iomap.h inclusions
ARM: msm: fix sirc code for multiplatform
ARM: msm: fix gpiomux config for multiplatform
ARM: msm: fix vic irqchip for multiplatform
gpio: move msm-v1 driver to mach-msm
clocksource: qcom: make mach-msm and mach-qcom coexist
ARM: msm: make smd behave like a normal driver
ARM: msm: rename conflicting symbols
ARM: msm: pass gpio irq range as resource
ARM: msm: clean up irq handling
ARM: msm: make msm_smd.h global
ARM: msm: make all header files local
ARM: msm: enable multiplatform support
arch/arm/Kconfig | 12 -
arch/arm/configs/msm_defconfig |7 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig | 91 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/Makefile | 11 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-halibut.c | 31 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-msm7x30.c | 98 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-qsd8x50.c | 138 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-gpio.c |7 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-mmc.c| 33 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout-panel.c |8 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.c| 26 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-trout.h|2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/clk.h |0
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock-pcom.c |5 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.c |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/clock.h |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/common.h | 16 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x00.c| 169 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-msm7x30.c| 78 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices-qsd8x50.c| 152 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/devices.h| 67 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/dma.c| 298
{drivers/gpio = arch/arm/mach-msm}/gpio-msm-v1.c | 33 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-8x50.c |2 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux-v1.h |9 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.c| 18 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/gpiomux.h| 10 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/dma.h | 151 --
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/entry-macro.S | 36 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/hardware.h | 18 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/irqs.h | 37 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/sirc.h | 98 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/io.c | 161 --
arch/arm/mach-msm/irq-vic.c| 146 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/irq.c| 29 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/irqs-7x00.h |3 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/irqs-7x30.h |2 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/irqs-8x50.h | 42 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/last_radio_log.c |1 -
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_gpiomux.h |0
.../mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap-7x00.h |5 +-
.../mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap-7x30.h |2 -
.../mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap-8x50.h | 12 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/{include/mach = }/msm_iomap.h | 24 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.c | 12 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/proc_comm.h |2 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/sirc.c | 44 +-
arch/arm/mach-msm/sirc.h | 34 +
arch/arm/mach-msm/smd.c| 135 +-
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]: arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +- Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the build system _at all_. It never has been (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory serves me right. I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have to bother you now if I would have used such language last year. You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do you prefer to fold such a patch into this series? Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
[Added Michal and kbuild.] Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 21:35 [+0100]: On Wednesday 04 March 2015 21:31:32 Paul Bolle wrote: Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]: arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +- Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the build system _at all_. It never has been (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory serves me right. I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have to bother you now if I would have used such language last year. I noticed this, but since it was not standing in the way of what I tried to do, I did not do anything about it here. You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do you prefer to fold such a patch into this series? The patch would be appreciated, but I'd keep it separate from this series. I saw a lot of things in need of cleanup in the files I touched here, but refused the temptation, in order to get something done and not start something controversial. I'll resubmit my trivial patch once this series hits linux-next. Feel free to prod me if I forget. Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wednesday 04 March 2015 21:31:32 Paul Bolle wrote: Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]: arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c | 17 +- Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the build system _at all_. It never has been (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory serves me right. I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have to bother you now if I would have used such language last year. I noticed this, but since it was not standing in the way of what I tried to do, I did not do anything about it here. You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do you prefer to fold such a patch into this series? The patch would be appreciated, but I'd keep it separate from this series. I saw a lot of things in need of cleanup in the files I touched here, but refused the temptation, in order to get something done and not start something controversial. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
Paul Bolle schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 22:09 [+0100]: [Added Michal and kbuild.] That I planned to do before deleting most of my draft. I should have deleted that line too. Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform support. In combination with the other patches that are now at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, it was more work to get to this point than the others, and some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, but I'm also very interested in people testing it. Didn't look at it in great detail (I will eventually), but it looks like your just cleaning things up .. Is that accurate ? Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support
On Wednesday 04 March 2015 22:11:41 dwal...@fifo99.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: This is my final piece of the puzzle for ARMv6/v7 multiplatform support. In combination with the other patches that are now at git://kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git multiplatform-4.0-rc2 and the at91 and shmobile parts from other developers, you can now build one kernel that includes all ARMv6 and ARMv7 targets we support in Linux. Since mach-msm has seen very few updates over the last years, it was more work to get to this point than the others, and some patches are more of a band-aid than a proper solution. Still, I think that each patch in the series is an improvement over the status-quo and I really want to see the last one merged into 4.1 and it depends on all the other ones. Stephen Boyd mentioned on IRC that he has been workin on a similar series, and I'm more than happy to replace some of this work with patches that he has done, as long as we can still have the full multiplatform support for 4.1. Since a lot of the patches are nontrivial and I have not been able to test any of this, I'm posting it as an RFC, but I'm also very interested in people testing it. Didn't look at it in great detail (I will eventually), but it looks like your just cleaning things up .. Is that accurate ? Yes: if I did everything right, there should be no functional changes. Most of the work was converting compile-time conditionals into runtime conditionals, to ensure that things work when we enable all options at once. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
