Patchwork [GIT,PULL,2/3] ARM: davinci: SoC updates for v3.10 (part 2)

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Sekhar Nori
Date April 15, 2013, 5:23 p.m.
Message ID <1366046599-6590-2-git-send-email-nsekhar@ti.com>
Download mbox
Permalink /patch/236659/
State New
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nsekhar/linux-davinci.git tags/davinci-for-v3.10/soc-2

Comments

Sekhar Nori - April 15, 2013, 5:23 p.m.
Hi Arnd, Olof,

Can you please the following SoC updates for DaVinci.
The branch depends on (and merges) an immutable branch
from Ohad adding DA8XX rempote proc driver.

Thanks,
Sekhar

The following changes since commit a0e5cda94cf0fab47a9bc87c50bce7f5cd26acda:

  Merge branch 'for-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ohad/remoteproc into v3.10/soc (2013-04-15 14:37:45 +0530)

are available in the git repository at:


  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nsekhar/linux-davinci.git tags/davinci-for-v3.10/soc-2

for you to fetch changes up to 1511a86e71baebc7b27da5f52cbaf3272f13d556:

  ARM: davinci: ensure global variables are declared (2013-04-15 15:13:13 +0530)

----------------------------------------------------------------
v3.10 SoC updates for DaVinci

This set of patches add support for remoteproc
used to control the DSP and also fix sparse
errors existing for quite some time.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Tivy (1):
      ARM: davinci: da8xx: add remoteproc support

Sekhar Nori (3):
      ARM: davinci: da8xx dt: make file local symbols static
      ARM: davinci: sram.c: fix incorrect type in assignment
      ARM: davinci: ensure global variables are declared

 Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt        |    6 ++
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/da8xx-dt.c           |    4 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/devices-da8xx.c      |   88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/da8xx.h |    4 ++
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/pm.c                 |    1 +
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/sram.c               |    4 +-
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/usb.c                |    1 +
 7 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Olof Johansson - April 15, 2013, 8:18 p.m.
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:53:18PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> Hi Arnd, Olof,
> 
> Can you please the following SoC updates for DaVinci.
> The branch depends on (and merges) an immutable branch
> from Ohad adding DA8XX rempote proc driver.

Hi,

Where is this branch from? Git URL and branch name, please -- we prefer to pull
these in as separate branches under depends/* as well to document it.


-Olof
Sekhar Nori - April 16, 2013, 6:12 a.m.
On 4/16/2013 1:48 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:53:18PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>> Hi Arnd, Olof,
>>
>> Can you please the following SoC updates for DaVinci.
>> The branch depends on (and merges) an immutable branch
>> from Ohad adding DA8XX rempote proc driver.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Where is this branch from? Git URL and branch name, please -- we prefer to pull
> these in as separate branches under depends/* as well to document it.

Here is the repo and branch:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ohad/remoteproc.git for-next

Thanks,
Sekhar
Olof Johansson - April 16, 2013, 4:48 p.m.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:42:31AM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> On 4/16/2013 1:48 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:53:18PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> >> Hi Arnd, Olof,
> >>
> >> Can you please the following SoC updates for DaVinci.
> >> The branch depends on (and merges) an immutable branch
> >> from Ohad adding DA8XX rempote proc driver.
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Where is this branch from? Git URL and branch name, please -- we prefer to pull
> > these in as separate branches under depends/* as well to document it.
> 
> Here is the repo and branch:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ohad/remoteproc.git for-next

Oh! Looking at that branch, and the new branch from you, I don't actually see
a dependency between them. Sure, the Davinci mach-side code registers a new
device, but until the driver has the corresponding changes, there's no breakage
caused by the new registration. There are no new data structures introduced
either, so there's no build-time dependency added.

So it would be just as easy to just merge this as a nondependent branch. When
both sides of the change land, remoteproc will work. But until then, nothing
existing will be broken.

Sound ok? If so, please just rebase your 4 patches on top of the old SoC branch
without the dependency and send a fresh pull request, please. :)

-Olof
Sekhar Nori - April 17, 2013, 2:15 p.m.
On 4/16/2013 10:18 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:42:31AM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>> On 4/16/2013 1:48 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:53:18PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>>>> Hi Arnd, Olof,
>>>>
>>>> Can you please the following SoC updates for DaVinci.
>>>> The branch depends on (and merges) an immutable branch
>>>> from Ohad adding DA8XX rempote proc driver.
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Where is this branch from? Git URL and branch name, please -- we prefer to pull
>>> these in as separate branches under depends/* as well to document it.
>>
>> Here is the repo and branch:
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ohad/remoteproc.git for-next
> 
> Oh! Looking at that branch, and the new branch from you, I don't actually see
> a dependency between them. Sure, the Davinci mach-side code registers a new
> device, but until the driver has the corresponding changes, there's no breakage
> caused by the new registration. There are no new data structures introduced
> either, so there's no build-time dependency added.

That's right! I can swear there was some platform data that the driver
needed at some stage which caused the dependency. Whatever that was, its
gone now (and I failed to notice it) so there is no real need of merging
the remoteproc branch.

> So it would be just as easy to just merge this as a nondependent branch. When
> both sides of the change land, remoteproc will work. But until then, nothing
> existing will be broken.
> 
> Sound ok? If so, please just rebase your 4 patches on top of the old SoC branch
> without the dependency and send a fresh pull request, please. :)

Okay, I will rebase and send updated pull request. I will have to update
the board support pull request too.

Thanks,
Sekhar