linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in:
drivers/clk/bcm/Kconfig
between commit:
ec8f24b7faaf ("treewide: Add SPDX license identifier - Makefile/Kconfig")
from Linus' tree and commit:
5d59f12a19e6 ("clk: bcm: Make BCM2835 clock drivers selectable")
from the clk tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc drivers/clk/bcm/Kconfig
index 29ee7b776cd4,0eb281d597fc..
--- a/drivers/clk/bcm/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/bcm/Kconfig
@@@ -1,4 -1,12 +1,14 @@@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
++
+ config CLK_BCM2835
+ bool "Broadcom BCM2835 clock support"
+ depends on ARCH_BCM2835 || ARCH_BRCMSTB || COMPILE_TEST
+ depends on COMMON_CLK
+ default ARCH_BCM2835 || ARCH_BRCMSTB
+ help
+ Enable common clock framework support for Broadcom BCM2835
+ SoCs.
+
config CLK_BCM_63XX
bool "Broadcom BCM63xx clock support"
depends on ARCH_BCM_63XX || COMPILE_TEST
pgpqbrRsZ0nMq.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in:
MAINTAINERS
between commit:
82abbea734d6 ("MAINTAINERS: fix alphabetical ordering")
from Linus' tree and commit:
6d7489c74a6e ("clk: axs10x: introduce AXS10X pll driver")
from the clk tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
BTW, Linus, I am using your perl script to check my resolution results
(thanks), but could you please make it executable?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc MAINTAINERS
index fdbe3da4d5de,c571fcf62740..
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@@ -12599,6 -12738,6 +12599,12 @@@ F: drivers/clocksource/arc_timer.
F:drivers/tty/serial/arc_uart.c
T:git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vgupta/arc.git
++SYNOPSYS ARC SDP clock driver
++M:Eugeniy Paltsev
++S:Supported
++F:drivers/clk/axs10x/*
++F:Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/snps,pll-clock.txt
++
SYNOPSYS ARC SDP platform support
M:Alexey Brodkin
S:Supported
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in:
MAINTAINERS
between commit:
82abbea734d6 ("MAINTAINERS: fix alphabetical ordering")
from Linus' tree and commit:
6d7489c74a6e ("clk: axs10x: introduce AXS10X pll driver")
from the clk tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
BTW, Linus, I am using your perl script to check my resolution results
(thanks), but could you please make it executable?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc MAINTAINERS
index fdbe3da4d5de,c571fcf62740..
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@@ -12599,6 -12738,6 +12599,12 @@@ F: drivers/clocksource/arc_timer.
F:drivers/tty/serial/arc_uart.c
T:git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vgupta/arc.git
++SYNOPSYS ARC SDP clock driver
++M:Eugeniy Paltsev
++S:Supported
++F:drivers/clk/axs10x/*
++F:Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/snps,pll-clock.txt
++
SYNOPSYS ARC SDP platform support
M:Alexey Brodkin
S:Supported
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Mike,
Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig between commit
a85cade6762b ("powerpc: Update all configs using savedefconfig") from
the tree and commit 8f0ab1e14139 ("powerpc/corenet: Enable CLK_QORIQ")
from the clk tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig
index 51866f170684,cce62e934e0c..
--- a/arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig
+++ b/arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig
@@@ -138,10 -143,11 +138,11 @@@ CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DS1307=
CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DS1374=y
CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DS3232=y
CONFIG_UIO=y
-CONFIG_STAGING=y
-CONFIG_MEMORY=y
CONFIG_VIRT_DRIVERS=y
CONFIG_FSL_HV_MANAGER=y
+CONFIG_STAGING=y
+CONFIG_FSL_CORENET_CF=y
+ CONFIG_CLK_QORIQ=y
CONFIG_EXT2_FS=y
CONFIG_EXT3_FS=y
# CONFIG_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED is not set
pgp9uen3fkYoF.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig between commit a85cade6762b (powerpc: Update all configs using savedefconfig) from the tree and commit 8f0ab1e14139 (powerpc/corenet: Enable CLK_QORIQ) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au diff --cc arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig index 51866f170684,cce62e934e0c.. --- a/arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig +++ b/arch/powerpc/configs/corenet32_smp_defconfig @@@ -138,10 -143,11 +138,11 @@@ CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DS1307= CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DS1374=y CONFIG_RTC_DRV_DS3232=y CONFIG_UIO=y -CONFIG_STAGING=y -CONFIG_MEMORY=y CONFIG_VIRT_DRIVERS=y CONFIG_FSL_HV_MANAGER=y +CONFIG_STAGING=y +CONFIG_FSL_CORENET_CF=y + CONFIG_CLK_QORIQ=y CONFIG_EXT2_FS=y CONFIG_EXT3_FS=y # CONFIG_EXT3_DEFAULTS_TO_ORDERED is not set pgp9uen3fkYoF.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On 29/01/2014 04:25, Stephen Rothwell :
> Hi Mike,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> drivers/clk/Makefile between commit 0ad6125b1579 ("clk: at91: add PMC
> base support") from Linus' tree and commit fd3fdaf09f26 ("clk: sort
> Makefile") from the clk tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Your fix is correct. Thanks Stephen.
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre
--
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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On 29/01/2014 04:25, Stephen Rothwell : Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/Makefile between commit 0ad6125b1579 (clk: at91: add PMC base support) from Linus' tree and commit fd3fdaf09f26 (clk: sort Makefile) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). Your fix is correct. Thanks Stephen. Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre -- 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/
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Mike,
Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
drivers/clk/Makefile between commit 0ad6125b1579 ("clk: at91: add PMC
base support") from Linus' tree and commit fd3fdaf09f26 ("clk: sort
Makefile") from the clk tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/clk/Makefile
index a277875d64a7,51a4c0dac1af..
--- a/drivers/clk/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/clk/Makefile
@@@ -9,46 -9,43 +9,44 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) += clk-gate.
obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) += clk-mux.o
obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) += clk-composite.o
- # SoCs specific
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835)+= clk-bcm2835.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EFM32) += clk-efm32gg.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NOMADIK)+= clk-nomadik.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += clk-highbank.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += hisilicon/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NSPIRE) += clk-nspire.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXS)+= mxs/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SOCFPGA)+= socfpga/
- obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SPEAR) += spear/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U300) += clk-u300.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_VERSATILE) += versatile/
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_QCOM) += qcom/
- obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_ORION) += mvebu/
+ # hardware specific clock types
+ # please keep this section sorted lexicographically by file/directory path
name
++obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AT91) += at91/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AXI_CLKGEN) += clk-axi-clkgen.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835)+= clk-bcm2835.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EFM32) += clk-efm32gg.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += clk-highbank.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_LOONGSON1) += clk-ls1x.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_MAX77686) += clk-max77686.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NOMADIK)+= clk-nomadik.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NSPIRE) += clk-nspire.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_PPC_CORENET) += clk-ppc-corenet.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_S2MPS11) += clk-s2mps11.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI5351) += clk-si5351.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI570)+= clk-si570.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_TWL6040) += clk-twl6040.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U300) += clk-u300.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_VT8500) += clk-vt8500.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_WM831X) += clk-wm831x.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_XGENE)+= clk-xgene.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += hisilicon/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_KEYSTONE) += keystone/
ifeq ($(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK), y)
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MMP)+= mmp/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MMP)+= mmp/
endif
- obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_LOONGSON1) += clk-ls1x.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U8500) += ux500/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_VT8500) += clk-vt8500.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SIRF) += sirf/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ZYNQ) += zynq/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/
- obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SAMSUNG)+= samsung/
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_XGENE) += clk-xgene.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_KEYSTONE) += keystone/
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AT91) += at91/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_ORION) += mvebu/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXS)+= mxs/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_QCOM) += qcom/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SAMSUNG)+= samsung/
obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI) += shmobile/
-
- obj-$(CONFIG_X86) += x86/
- obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM)+= bcm/
-
- # Chip specific
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AXI_CLKGEN) += clk-axi-clkgen.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_WM831X) += clk-wm831x.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_MAX77686) += clk-max77686.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI5351) += clk-si5351.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI570) += clk-si570.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_S2MPS11) += clk-s2mps11.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_TWL6040) += clk-twl6040.o
- obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_PPC_CORENET) += clk-ppc-corenet.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SIRF) += sirf/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SOCFPGA)+= socfpga/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SPEAR) += spear/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS) += ti/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U8500) += ux500/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_VERSATILE)+= versatile/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_X86) += x86/
+ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ZYNQ) += zynq/
pgp8jq0GYXTpE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/Makefile between commit 0ad6125b1579 (clk: at91: add PMC base support) from Linus' tree and commit fd3fdaf09f26 (clk: sort Makefile) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au diff --cc drivers/clk/Makefile index a277875d64a7,51a4c0dac1af.. --- a/drivers/clk/Makefile +++ b/drivers/clk/Makefile @@@ -9,46 -9,43 +9,44 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) += clk-gate. obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) += clk-mux.o obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) += clk-composite.o - # SoCs specific - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835)+= clk-bcm2835.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EFM32) += clk-efm32gg.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NOMADIK)+= clk-nomadik.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += clk-highbank.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += hisilicon/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NSPIRE) += clk-nspire.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXS)+= mxs/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SOCFPGA)+= socfpga/ - obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SPEAR) += spear/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U300) += clk-u300.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_VERSATILE) += versatile/ - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_QCOM) += qcom/ - obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_ORION) += mvebu/ + # hardware specific clock types + # please keep this section sorted lexicographically by file/directory path name ++obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AT91) += at91/ + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AXI_CLKGEN) += clk-axi-clkgen.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835)+= clk-bcm2835.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EFM32) += clk-efm32gg.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HIGHBANK) += clk-highbank.o + obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_LOONGSON1) += clk-ls1x.o + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_MAX77686) += clk-max77686.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NOMADIK)+= clk-nomadik.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_NSPIRE) += clk-nspire.o + obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_PPC_CORENET) += clk-ppc-corenet.o + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_S2MPS11) += clk-s2mps11.o + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI5351) += clk-si5351.o + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI570)+= clk-si570.o + obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_TWL6040) += clk-twl6040.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U300) += clk-u300.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_VT8500) += clk-vt8500.o + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_WM831X) += clk-wm831x.o + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_XGENE)+= clk-xgene.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HI3xxx) += hisilicon/ + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_KEYSTONE) += keystone/ ifeq ($(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK), y) - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MMP)+= mmp/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MMP)+= mmp/ endif - obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_LOONGSON1) += clk-ls1x.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U8500) += ux500/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_VT8500) += clk-vt8500.o - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SIRF) += sirf/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ZYNQ) += zynq/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/ - obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SAMSUNG)+= samsung/ - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_XGENE) += clk-xgene.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_KEYSTONE) += keystone/ - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AT91) += at91/ + obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_ORION) += mvebu/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXS)+= mxs/ + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_QCOM) += qcom/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += rockchip/ + obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SAMSUNG)+= samsung/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE_MULTI) += shmobile/ - - obj-$(CONFIG_X86) += x86/ - obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM)+= bcm/ - - # Chip specific - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_AXI_CLKGEN) += clk-axi-clkgen.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_WM831X) += clk-wm831x.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_MAX77686) += clk-max77686.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI5351) += clk-si5351.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_SI570) += clk-si570.o - obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_S2MPS11) += clk-s2mps11.o - obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_TWL6040) += clk-twl6040.o - obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_PPC_CORENET) += clk-ppc-corenet.o + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SIRF) += sirf/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SOCFPGA)+= socfpga/ + obj-$(CONFIG_PLAT_SPEAR) += spear/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS) += ti/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_U8500) += ux500/ + obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_VERSATILE)+= versatile/ + obj-$(CONFIG_X86) += x86/ + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ZYNQ) += zynq/ pgp8jq0GYXTpE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 05:22:25PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11)
> > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> > > > > On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Mike,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> > > > > > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d
> > > > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add
> > > > > > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
> > > > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes")
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add
> > > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > > > > flag") from the clk tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
> > > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of
> > > > > > course,
> > > > > > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is
> > > > > > required).
> > > > >
> > > > > The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose
> > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > > > over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds
> > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> > > > > clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up
> > > > > with
> > > > > only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags
> > > > > are orthogonal.
> > > >
> > > > I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in
> > > > case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case
> > > > shown here.
> > >
> > > Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think
> > > this will be a rare event.
> >
> > Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the
> > above as:
> >
> > (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two
> > branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively)
> >
> > "Stephen was wrong"
> > "Stephen should have taken both"
> > "Stephen was right"
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also,
> > you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to
> > resolve these conflicts).
>
> OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like
> below. Is this correct/better?
Yes, looks correct to me.
Sören
--
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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Stephen
On 28/08/13 08:22, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette
>> > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11)
> > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> > > > > On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > > > > > Hi Mike,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
>> > > > > > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d
>> > > > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add
>> > > > > > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
>> > > > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet
>> > > > > > muxes") from
>> > > > > > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add
>> > > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
>> > > > > > flag") from the clk tree.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
>> > > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may,
>> > > > > > of course,
>> > > > > > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is
>> > > > > > required).
> > > > >
> > > > > The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose
> > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > > > over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds
> > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> > > > > clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends
> > > > > up with
> > > > > only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two
> > > > > flags
> > > > > are orthogonal.
> > >
> > > I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in
> > > case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the
> > > case
> > > shown here.
>>> > >
>>> > > Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think
>>> > > this will be a rare event.
>> >
>> > Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the
>> > above as:
>> >
>> > (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two
>> > branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively)
>> >
>> > "Stephen was wrong"
>> > "Stephen should have taken both"
>> > "Stephen was right"
>> >
>> > :-)
:-)
I think the 3 way diff omitting hunks where once branch's changes are
discarded might have confused us, even though you mentioned that there
were other conflicts (I only twigged why I couldn't see them after
seeing your new resolution).
>> >
>> > I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also,
>> > you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to
>> > resolve these conflicts).
> OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like
> below. Is this correct/better?
It looks correct to me now.
Thanks
James
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all,
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette
> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11)
> > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> > > > On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > Hi Mike,
> > > > >
> > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> > > > > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("clk/zynq/clkc:
> > > > > Add
> > > > > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
> > > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes") from
> > > > > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add
> > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > > > flag") from the clk tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
> > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of
> > > > > course,
> > > > > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
> > > >
> > > > The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
> > > >
> > > > I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > > over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> > > > clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with
> > > > only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags
> > > > are orthogonal.
> > >
> > > I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in
> > > case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case
> > > shown here.
> >
> > Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think
> > this will be a rare event.
>
> Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the above
> as:
>
> (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two
> branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively)
>
> "Stephen was wrong"
> "Stephen should have taken both"
> "Stephen was right"
>
> :-)
>
> I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also,
> you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to
> resolve these conflicts).
OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like
below. Is this correct/better?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
6c92037c7a4574c16bc86873fe603b39b7fbe98a
diff --cc drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c
index 089d3e3,e05c9e3..6f104db
--- a/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c
@@@ -293,8 -294,9 +295,9 @@@ static void __init zynq_clk_setup(struc
swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents[i + 1] = dummy_nm;
}
clks[swdt] = clk_register_mux(NULL, clk_output_name[swdt],
- swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
- SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0, _lock);
+ swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT |
+ CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0,
- _lock);
++ _lock);
/* DDR clocks */
clk = clk_register_divider(NULL, "ddr2x_div", "ddrpll", 0,
@@@ -366,8 -369,8 +370,8 @@@
CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED | CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO,
_lock);
clk = clk_register_mux(NULL, "gem0_emio_mux", gem0_mux_parents, 2,
- CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0,
- CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0,
-- _lock);
++ CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT,
++ SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, _lock);
clks[gem0] = clk_register_gate(NULL, clk_output_name[gem0],
"gem0_emio_mux", CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 0, 0, _lock);
@@@ -389,8 -393,8 +394,8 @@@
CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED | CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO,
_lock);
clk = clk_register_mux(NULL, "gem1_emio_mux", gem1_mux_parents, 2,
- CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0,
- CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0,
-- _lock);
++ CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT,
++ SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, _lock);
clks[gem1] = clk_register_gate(NULL, clk_output_name[gem1],
"gem1_emio_mux", CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 0, 0, _lock);
pgpgmXZXtzE6u.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all, On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote: On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette mturque...@linaro.org wrote: Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11) On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case shown here. Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think this will be a rare event. Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the above as: (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively) Stephen was wrong Stephen should have taken both Stephen was right :-) I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also, you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to resolve these conflicts). OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like below. Is this correct/better? -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au 6c92037c7a4574c16bc86873fe603b39b7fbe98a diff --cc drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c index 089d3e3,e05c9e3..6f104db --- a/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c +++ b/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c @@@ -293,8 -294,9 +295,9 @@@ static void __init zynq_clk_setup(struc swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents[i + 1] = dummy_nm; } clks[swdt] = clk_register_mux(NULL, clk_output_name[swdt], - swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, - SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0, swdtclk_lock); + swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | + CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0, - gem0clk_lock); ++ swdtclk_lock); /* DDR clocks */ clk = clk_register_divider(NULL, ddr2x_div, ddrpll, 0, @@@ -366,8 -369,8 +370,8 @@@ CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED | CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO, gem0clk_lock); clk = clk_register_mux(NULL, gem0_emio_mux, gem0_mux_parents, 2, - CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, - CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, -- gem0clk_lock); ++ CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, ++ SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, gem0clk_lock); clks[gem0] = clk_register_gate(NULL, clk_output_name[gem0], gem0_emio_mux, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, SLCR_GEM0_CLK_CTRL, 0, 0, gem0clk_lock); @@@ -389,8 -393,8 +394,8 @@@ CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED | CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO, gem1clk_lock); clk = clk_register_mux(NULL, gem1_emio_mux, gem1_mux_parents, 2, - CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, - CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, -- gem1clk_lock); ++ CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, ++ SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 6, 1, 0, gem1clk_lock); clks[gem1] = clk_register_gate(NULL, clk_output_name[gem1], gem1_emio_mux, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, SLCR_GEM1_CLK_CTRL, 0, 0, gem1clk_lock); pgpgmXZXtzE6u.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Stephen On 28/08/13 08:22, Stephen Rothwell wrote: On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote: On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette mturque...@linaro.org wrote: Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11) On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case shown here. Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think this will be a rare event. Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the above as: (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively) Stephen was wrong Stephen should have taken both Stephen was right :-) :-) I think the 3 way diff omitting hunks where once branch's changes are discarded might have confused us, even though you mentioned that there were other conflicts (I only twigged why I couldn't see them after seeing your new resolution). I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also, you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to resolve these conflicts). OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like below. Is this correct/better? It looks correct to me now. Thanks James signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 05:22:25PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote: On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette mturque...@linaro.org wrote: Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11) On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case shown here. Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think this will be a rare event. Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the above as: (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively) Stephen was wrong Stephen should have taken both Stephen was right :-) I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also, you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to resolve these conflicts). OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like below. Is this correct/better? Yes, looks correct to me. Sören -- 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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all,
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette wrote:
>
> Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11)
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> > > On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi Mike,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> > > > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("clk/zynq/clkc:
> > > > Add
> > > > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
> > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes") from
> > > > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > > flag") from the clk tree.
> > > >
> > > > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
> > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course,
> > > > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
> > >
> > > The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
> > >
> > > I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> > > clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with
> > > only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags
> > > are orthogonal.
> >
> > I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in
> > case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case
> > shown here.
>
> Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think
> this will be a rare event.
Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the above
as:
(for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two
branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively)
"Stephen was wrong"
"Stephen should have taken both"
"Stephen was right"
:-)
I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also,
you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to
resolve these conflicts).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
pgpZ_hx2fw1cs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11)
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> > On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Mike,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> > > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add
> > > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
> > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes") from
> > > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > > flag") from the clk tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
> > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course,
> > > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
> >
> > The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
> >
> > I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> > clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with
> > only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags
> > are orthogonal.
>
> I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in
> case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case
> shown here.
Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think
this will be a rare event.
Regards,
Mike
>
> Sören
--
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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote:
> On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add
> > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
> > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes") from
> > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> > flag") from the clk tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
> > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course,
> > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
>
> The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
>
> I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with
> only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags
> are orthogonal.
I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in
case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case
shown here.
Sören
--
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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add
> dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
> ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes") from
> Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
> flag") from the clk tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
> CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course,
> be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
The case you mentioned looks correct to me.
I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with
only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags
are orthogonal.
Thanks
James
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Mike,
Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add
dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3
("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes") from
Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT
flag") from the clk tree.
I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose
CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course,
be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c
index 089d3e3,e05c9e3..000
--- a/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c
@@@ -293,8 -294,9 +295,9 @@@ static void __init zynq_clk_setup(struc
swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents[i + 1] = dummy_nm;
}
clks[swdt] = clk_register_mux(NULL, clk_output_name[swdt],
- swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
- SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0, _lock);
+ swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT |
+ CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0,
- _lock);
++ _lock);
/* DDR clocks */
clk = clk_register_divider(NULL, "ddr2x_div", "ddrpll", 0,
pgpCnozH9UHIn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au diff --cc drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c index 089d3e3,e05c9e3..000 --- a/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c +++ b/drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c @@@ -293,8 -294,9 +295,9 @@@ static void __init zynq_clk_setup(struc swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents[i + 1] = dummy_nm; } clks[swdt] = clk_register_mux(NULL, clk_output_name[swdt], - swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, - SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0, swdtclk_lock); + swdt_ext_clk_mux_parents, 2, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | + CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, SLCR_SWDT_CLK_SEL, 0, 1, 0, - gem0clk_lock); ++ swdtclk_lock); /* DDR clocks */ clk = clk_register_divider(NULL, ddr2x_div, ddrpll, 0, pgpCnozH9UHIn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. Thanks James signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case shown here. Sören -- 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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11) On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case shown here. Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think this will be a rare event. Regards, Mike Sören -- 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: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree
Hi all, On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette mturque...@linaro.org wrote: Quoting Sören Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11) On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Mike, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d (clk/zynq/clkc: Add dedicated spinlock for the SWDT) and 765b7d4c4cb3 (clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to ethernet muxes) from Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 (clk: add CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT flag) from the clk tree. I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I chose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which may, of course, be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). The case you mentioned looks correct to me. I can't see todays -next yet, but if by choose CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution ends up with only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the two flags are orthogonal. I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct, but in case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in the case shown here. Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I think this will be a rare event. Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read the above as: (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively) Stephen was wrong Stephen should have taken both Stephen was right :-) I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Also, you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else has to resolve these conflicts). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au pgpZ_hx2fw1cs.pgp Description: PGP signature
