Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pcmcia tree with the pxa tree

[Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Marc Zyngier <maz@misterjones.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:17:08 +0800
> Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
>> Could you take a look into this, I wonder you may need to rebase
>> against Russell's PCMCIA generalization stuffs. Let me know if you
>> want me to drop this patch.
>
> Patch looks good. I'm more worried about creating dependencies between
> trees:
>
> - Stephen fix depends on Russell's changes, which are in Dominik's tree,
> - My patch depends on Zeus support, which is in your tree,
> - Rebasing Zeus PCMCIA support against Dominik's tree is just another
>  dependency between the two trees.
>
> Should we drop my PCMCIA changes until both Russell's changes and main
> Zeus support are merged?
>

I'd propose to postpone your patches until dependency is resolved, will
send a second git pull til then. Sounds OK to you?

> I'm opened to any suggestion.
>
>        M.
>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>> <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> > Hi Dominik,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the pcmcia tree got a conflict in
>> > drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_viper.c between commit
>> > c9b74a4489db7e6fe03fbee11f406b9641baae55 ("[ARM] pxa/zeus: make
>> > Viper pcmcia support more generic to support Zeus") from the pxa
>> > tree and commit 66024db57d5b9011e274b314affad68f370c0d6f ("PCMCIA:
>> > stop duplicating pci_irq in soc_pcmcia_socket") from the pcmcia
>> > tree.
>> >
>> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
>> >
>> > diff --cc drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_viper.c
>> > index 7a16ae9,27be2e1..0000000
>> > --- a/drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_viper.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/pcmcia/pxa2xx_viper.c
>> > @@@ -30,35 -32,23 +30,35 @@@
>> >  #include "soc_common.h"
>> >  #include "pxa2xx_base.h"
>> >
>> >  +static struct platform_device *arcom_pcmcia_dev;
>> >  +
>> >  static struct pcmcia_irqs irqs[] = {
>> >  -      { 0, gpio_to_irq(VIPER_CF_CD_GPIO),  "PCMCIA_CD" }
>> >  +      {
>> >  +              .sock   = 0,
>> >  +              .str    = "PCMCIA_CD",
>> >  +      },
>> >  };
>> >
>> >  +static inline struct arcom_pcmcia_pdata *viper_get_pdata(void)
>> >  +{
>> >  +      return arcom_pcmcia_dev->dev.platform_data;
>> >  +}
>> >  +
>> >  static int viper_pcmcia_hw_init(struct soc_pcmcia_socket *skt)
>> >  {
>> >  +      struct arcom_pcmcia_pdata *pdata = viper_get_pdata();
>> >        unsigned long flags;
>> >
>> > -       skt->irq = gpio_to_irq(pdata->rdy_gpio);
>> >  -      skt->socket.pci_irq = gpio_to_irq(VIPER_CF_RDY_GPIO);
>> > ++      skt->socket.pci_irq = gpio_to_irq(pdata->rdy_gpio);
>> >  +      irqs[0].irq = gpio_to_irq(pdata->cd_gpio);
>> >
>> >  -      if (gpio_request(VIPER_CF_CD_GPIO, "CF detect"))
>> >  +      if (gpio_request(pdata->cd_gpio, "CF detect"))
>> >                goto err_request_cd;
>> >
>> >  -      if (gpio_request(VIPER_CF_RDY_GPIO, "CF ready"))
>> >  +      if (gpio_request(pdata->rdy_gpio, "CF ready"))
>> >                goto err_request_rdy;
>> >
>> >  -      if (gpio_request(VIPER_CF_POWER_GPIO, "CF power"))
>> >  +      if (gpio_request(pdata->pwr_gpio, "CF power"))
>> >                goto err_request_pwr;
>> >
>> >        local_irq_save(flags);
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> And if you don't know where you're going, any road will take you
> there...
>