mbox

[GIT,PULL,2/3] msm fixes for 3.11

Message ID 1371232615-30731-4-git-send-email-davidb@codeaurora.org
State New
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davidb/linux-msm.git tags/msm-fix-for-3.11

Message

David Brown June 14, 2013, 5:56 p.m. UTC
The following changes since commit f722406faae2d073cc1d01063d1123c35425939e:

  Linux 3.10-rc1 (2013-05-11 17:14:08 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davidb/linux-msm.git tags/msm-fix-for-3.11

for you to fetch changes up to 7ba655fc965b073292349fa49fb9d16d701185bc:

  gpio: msm-v1: Remove errant __devinit to fix compile (2013-06-12 14:49:06 -0700)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Some minor fixes for MSM for 3.11

I don't expect these to be necessary for stable, since the fixes are
to recently added code.  The strncpy fix is only in debug code that
isn't normally compiled or used (and is being removed in upcoming
patches).

----------------------------------------------------------------
Chen Gang (1):
      arch: arm: mach-msm: using strlcpy instead of strncpy

Stephen Boyd (3):
      ARM: dts: msm: Fix bad register addresses
      mfd: ssbi: Add MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE
      gpio: msm-v1: Remove errant __devinit to fix compile

 arch/arm/boot/dts/msm8660-surf.dts | 4 ++--
 arch/arm/boot/dts/msm8960-cdp.dts  | 2 +-
 arch/arm/mach-msm/clock-debug.c    | 2 +-
 drivers/gpio/gpio-msm-v1.c         | 2 +-
 drivers/ssbi/ssbi.c                | 1 +
 5 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Comments

Olof Johansson June 15, 2013, 1:26 a.m. UTC | #1
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:56:55AM -0700, David Brown wrote:
> The following changes since commit f722406faae2d073cc1d01063d1123c35425939e:
> 
>   Linux 3.10-rc1 (2013-05-11 17:14:08 -0700)
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davidb/linux-msm.git tags/msm-fix-for-3.11
> 
> for you to fetch changes up to 7ba655fc965b073292349fa49fb9d16d701185bc:
> 
>   gpio: msm-v1: Remove errant __devinit to fix compile (2013-06-12 14:49:06 -0700)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Some minor fixes for MSM for 3.11
> 
> I don't expect these to be necessary for stable, since the fixes are
> to recently added code.  The strncpy fix is only in debug code that
> isn't normally compiled or used (and is being removed in upcoming
> patches).
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Chen Gang (1):
>       arch: arm: mach-msm: using strlcpy instead of strncpy
> 
> Stephen Boyd (3):
>       ARM: dts: msm: Fix bad register addresses

Hmm. I see that the msm-hsuart device nodes completely lack reg entries. That's
considerably more important to fix than the cosmetic unit address that's not
even needed unless two nodes happen to have the same name.

I ended up pulling this in underneath of the cleanup branch to resolve the
add/change conflicts there. 

-Olof
David Brown June 17, 2013, 8:26 p.m. UTC | #2
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 06:26:17PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:

>> Stephen Boyd (3):
>>       ARM: dts: msm: Fix bad register addresses
>
>Hmm. I see that the msm-hsuart device nodes completely lack reg entries. That's
>considerably more important to fix than the cosmetic unit address that's not
>even needed unless two nodes happen to have the same name.

I'm not seeing the missing reg entries in anyone's tree.

However, it appears that both of us resolved the merge conflict
differently, and both did it incorrectly.

How would you like this to be fixed?  Should I just send you a patch
based off of the current soc tree?

Thanks,
David
Olof Johansson June 17, 2013, 8:31 p.m. UTC | #3
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:26 PM, David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 06:26:17PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>
>>> Stephen Boyd (3):
>>>       ARM: dts: msm: Fix bad register addresses
>>
>>
>> Hmm. I see that the msm-hsuart device nodes completely lack reg entries.
>> That's
>> considerably more important to fix than the cosmetic unit address that's
>> not
>> even needed unless two nodes happen to have the same name.
>
>
> I'm not seeing the missing reg entries in anyone's tree.

Me neither. Hm. I wonder what I was looking at when I said that. Nevermind.

> However, it appears that both of us resolved the merge conflict
> differently, and both did it incorrectly.
>
> How would you like this to be fixed?  Should I just send you a patch
> based off of the current soc tree?

Yes, just send a patch, not a pull request.


-Olof