| Message ID | 20120216154941.GB11758@r65073-Latitude-D630 |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Shawn, On 02/16/2012 09:49 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's > irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top > of it. You're asking me to pull changes on top of a branch that I don't even have as you've rebased my changes. While it would work I don't think this is the right flow. Plus there is not really any reason for iMX changes to go thru me. Either Grant needs to stabilize his branch so you and I can send him pull requests or he can pull in our changes and rebase them as he rebases. I already asked him to do just that with my 1 patch others are dependent on. Rob > Regards, > Shawn > > The following changes since commit 53d7d9ee4c6611b13d9e7c77c02d5e9deed95da5: > > gpio: pl061: enable interrupts with DT style binding (2012-02-16 07:07:16 -0800) > > are available in the git repository at: > http://git.linaro.org/git/people/shawnguo/linux-2.6.git imx/irqdomain > > Shawn Guo (6): > ARM: imx5: adopt generic_chip irq_domain support for tzic > ARM: imx: eliminate macro IMX_GPIO_TO_IRQ() > ARM: imx: eliminate macro IOMUX_TO_IRQ() > ARM: imx: eliminate macro IRQ_GPIOx() > gpio/mxc: adopt irq_domain for gpio interrupt support > ARM: imx: remove macro MXC_GPIO_IRQ_START > > arch/arm/boot/dts/imx51.dtsi | 6 +++ > arch/arm/boot/dts/imx53.dtsi | 6 +++ > arch/arm/mach-imx/clock-mx51-mx53.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/eukrea_mbimx27-baseboard.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/eukrea_mbimx51-baseboard.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/imx51-dt.c | 30 ++++++------- > arch/arm/mach-imx/imx53-dt.c | 30 ++++++------- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-apf9328.c | 6 ++- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-armadillo5x0.c | 12 ++++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx27.c | 12 ++++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx35.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx51.c | 12 ++++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx51sd.c | 6 ++- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx27_visstrim_m10.c | 8 ++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c | 14 ------ > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-kzm_arm11_01.c | 20 +++++++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx21ads.c | 5 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx27_3ds.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx27ads.c | 12 +++--- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31_3ds.c | 13 +++--- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31ads.c | 14 ++++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31lilly.c | 10 +++- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31lite.c | 10 +++- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31moboard.c | 4 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx53_ard.c | 5 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mxt_td60.c | 6 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pca100.c | 4 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pcm037.c | 18 +++++--- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pcm038.c | 4 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-qong.c | 9 ++-- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-scb9328.c | 6 ++- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-vpr200.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mm-imx5.c | 6 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mx31lilly-db.c | 5 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mx31lite-db.c | 5 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mx51_efika.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-imx/pcm970-baseboard.c | 13 +++--- > arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/common.h | 3 +- > arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/hardware.h | 2 - > arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-mx3.h | 3 - > arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-v1.h | 12 +++--- > arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/irqs.h | 2 - > arch/arm/plat-mxc/tzic.c | 32 +++++++------- > drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c | 59 ++++++++++--------------- > 44 files changed, 279 insertions(+), 210 deletions(-)
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:50:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > Shawn, > > On 02/16/2012 09:49 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's > > irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top > > of it. > > You're asking me to pull changes on top of a branch that I don't even > have as you've rebased my changes. While it would work I don't think > this is the right flow. Plus there is not really any reason for iMX > changes to go thru me. > I thought I could ask you to pull because my changes depends on yours and Grant asked me to do so. > Either Grant needs to stabilize his branch so you and I can send him > pull requests or he can pull in our changes and rebase them as he > rebases. I already asked him to do just that with my 1 patch others are > dependent on. > I'm find with either way.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:50:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > Shawn, > > On 02/16/2012 09:49 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's > > irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top > > of it. > > You're asking me to pull changes on top of a branch that I don't even > have as you've rebased my changes. While it would work I don't think > this is the right flow. Plus there is not really any reason for iMX > changes to go thru me. > > Either Grant needs to stabilize his branch so you and I can send him > pull requests or he can pull in our changes and rebase them as he > rebases. I already asked him to do just that with my 1 patch others are > dependent on. > Hi Grant, Would you consider to take this request after you take Rob's generic_irq one?
On 03/14/2012 12:08 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:50:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: >> Shawn, >> >> On 02/16/2012 09:49 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: >>> Hi Rob, >>> >>> Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's >>> irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top >>> of it. >> >> You're asking me to pull changes on top of a branch that I don't even >> have as you've rebased my changes. While it would work I don't think >> this is the right flow. Plus there is not really any reason for iMX >> changes to go thru me. >> >> Either Grant needs to stabilize his branch so you and I can send him >> pull requests or he can pull in our changes and rebase them as he >> rebases. I already asked him to do just that with my 1 patch others are >> dependent on. >> > Hi Grant, > > Would you consider to take this request after you take Rob's > generic_irq one? You'll need rebase your branch as I did since Grant did. Rob
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03/14/2012 12:08 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:50:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: >>> Shawn, >>> >>> On 02/16/2012 09:49 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: >>>> Hi Rob, >>>> >>>> Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's >>>> irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top >>>> of it. >>> >>> You're asking me to pull changes on top of a branch that I don't even >>> have as you've rebased my changes. While it would work I don't think >>> this is the right flow. Plus there is not really any reason for iMX >>> changes to go thru me. >>> >>> Either Grant needs to stabilize his branch so you and I can send him >>> pull requests or he can pull in our changes and rebase them as he >>> rebases. I already asked him to do just that with my 1 patch others are >>> dependent on. >>> >> Hi Grant, >> >> Would you consider to take this request after you take Rob's >> generic_irq one? > > You'll need rebase your branch as I did since Grant did. Also, the imx changes should go via the arm-soc tree, not the irqdomain/next branch. irqdomain/next is stable now, so you can use it as your base. Rebase your changes on top of it and ask Arnd or Olof to pull the result into an arm-soc branch. g.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 09:44:26AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 03/14/2012 12:08 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:50:10AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > >>> Shawn, > >>> > >>> On 02/16/2012 09:49 AM, Shawn Guo wrote: > >>>> Hi Rob, > >>>> > >>>> Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's > >>>> irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top > >>>> of it. > >>> > >>> You're asking me to pull changes on top of a branch that I don't even > >>> have as you've rebased my changes. While it would work I don't think > >>> this is the right flow. Plus there is not really any reason for iMX > >>> changes to go thru me. > >>> > >>> Either Grant needs to stabilize his branch so you and I can send him > >>> pull requests or he can pull in our changes and rebase them as he > >>> rebases. I already asked him to do just that with my 1 patch others are > >>> dependent on. > >>> > >> Hi Grant, > >> > >> Would you consider to take this request after you take Rob's > >> generic_irq one? > > > > You'll need rebase your branch as I did since Grant did. > > Also, the imx changes should go via the arm-soc tree, not the > irqdomain/next branch. irqdomain/next is stable now, so you can use > it as your base. Rebase your changes on top of it and ask Arnd or > Olof to pull the result into an arm-soc branch. > Okay. Since imx change has a dependency on Rob's change, I have to wait until Rob's change shows up on irqdomain/next.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 08:22:46PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: ... > Okay. Since imx change has a dependency on Rob's change, I have to > wait until Rob's change shows up on irqdomain/next. It does not matter now. Arnd announced that arm-soc tree has closed for the coming merge window. I will wait for v3.4-rc1 then.
Hi Rob, Please pull imx irq_domain support below. It's based on Grant's irqdomain/next today with your generic-chip series applied on top of it. Regards, Shawn The following changes since commit 53d7d9ee4c6611b13d9e7c77c02d5e9deed95da5: gpio: pl061: enable interrupts with DT style binding (2012-02-16 07:07:16 -0800) are available in the git repository at: http://git.linaro.org/git/people/shawnguo/linux-2.6.git imx/irqdomain Shawn Guo (6): ARM: imx5: adopt generic_chip irq_domain support for tzic ARM: imx: eliminate macro IMX_GPIO_TO_IRQ() ARM: imx: eliminate macro IOMUX_TO_IRQ() ARM: imx: eliminate macro IRQ_GPIOx() gpio/mxc: adopt irq_domain for gpio interrupt support ARM: imx: remove macro MXC_GPIO_IRQ_START arch/arm/boot/dts/imx51.dtsi | 6 +++ arch/arm/boot/dts/imx53.dtsi | 6 +++ arch/arm/mach-imx/clock-mx51-mx53.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/eukrea_mbimx27-baseboard.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/eukrea_mbimx51-baseboard.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/imx51-dt.c | 30 ++++++------- arch/arm/mach-imx/imx53-dt.c | 30 ++++++------- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-apf9328.c | 6 ++- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-armadillo5x0.c | 12 ++++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx27.c | 12 ++++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx35.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx51.c | 12 ++++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-cpuimx51sd.c | 6 ++- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx27_visstrim_m10.c | 8 ++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c | 14 ------ arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-kzm_arm11_01.c | 20 +++++++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx21ads.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx27_3ds.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx27ads.c | 12 +++--- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31_3ds.c | 13 +++--- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31ads.c | 14 ++++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31lilly.c | 10 +++- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31lite.c | 10 +++- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx31moboard.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mx53_ard.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-mxt_td60.c | 6 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pca100.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pcm037.c | 18 +++++--- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-pcm038.c | 4 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-qong.c | 9 ++-- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-scb9328.c | 6 ++- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-vpr200.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mm-imx5.c | 6 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mx31lilly-db.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mx31lite-db.c | 5 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/mx51_efika.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-imx/pcm970-baseboard.c | 13 +++--- arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/common.h | 3 +- arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/hardware.h | 2 - arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-mx3.h | 3 - arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/iomux-v1.h | 12 +++--- arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/irqs.h | 2 - arch/arm/plat-mxc/tzic.c | 32 +++++++------- drivers/gpio/gpio-mxc.c | 59 ++++++++++--------------- 44 files changed, 279 insertions(+), 210 deletions(-)