Message ID | 20210309153443.16647-1-brgl@bgdev.pl |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [GIT,PULL] gpio: fixes for v5.12-rc3 | expand |
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:34 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > > Linus, > > Here's a bunch of fixes for the GPIO subsystem. We have two regressions in the > core code spotted right after the merge window, a series of fixes for ACPI GPIO > and a subsequent fix for a related regression in gpio-pca953x + a minor tweak > in .gitignore and a rework of handling of the gpio-line-names to remedy a > regression in stm32mp151. > > Please pull! > > Best Regards, > Bartosz Golaszewski > > The following changes since commit a38fd8748464831584a19438cbb3082b5a2dab15: > > Linux 5.12-rc2 (2021-03-05 17:33:41 -0800) > > are available in the Git repository at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brgl/linux.git tags/gpio-fixes-for-v5.12-rc3 > > for you to fetch changes up to b41ba2ec54a70908067034f139aa23d0dd2985ce: > > gpiolib: Read "gpio-line-names" from a firmware node (2021-03-08 11:59:17 +0100) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > gpio fixes for v5.12-rc3 > > - fix two regressions in core GPIO subsystem code: one NULL-pointer dereference > and one list corruption > - read GPIO line names from fwnode instead of using the generic device > properties to fix a regression on stm32mp151 > - fixes to ACPI GPIO and gpio-pca953x to handle a regression in IRQ handling > on Intel Galileo > - update .gitignore in GPIO selftests > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Andy Shevchenko (4): > gpiolib: acpi: Add ACPI_GPIO_QUIRK_ABSOLUTE_NUMBER quirk > gpiolib: acpi: Allow to find GpioInt() resource by name and index > gpio: pca953x: Set IRQ type when handle Intel Galileo Gen 2 > gpiolib: Read "gpio-line-names" from a firmware node > > Bartosz Golaszewski (1): > selftests: gpio: update .gitignore > > Johan Hovold (2): > gpio: fix NULL-deref-on-deregistration regression > gpio: fix gpio-device list corruption > > Yang Li (1): > gpiolib: acpi: Add missing IRQF_ONESHOT > > drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 78 ++++++++++----------------------- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 21 ++++++--- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 19 ++++---- > include/linux/acpi.h | 10 ++++- > include/linux/gpio/consumer.h | 2 + > tools/testing/selftests/gpio/.gitignore | 2 +- > 6 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-) Hi Linus, I realized only after I sent out this PR that I had rebased the branch on top of v5.12-rc2 (because of the v5.12-rc1 situation) without --rebase-merges and this caused git to drop the merge commit for Andy's pull-request. Please let me know if you can pull this as is or if I should rebuild my branch and resend. Best Regards, Bartosz Golaszewski
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 7:43 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > > I realized only after I sent out this PR that I had rebased the branch > on top of v5.12-rc2 (because of the v5.12-rc1 situation) without > --rebase-merges and this caused git to drop the merge commit for > Andy's pull-request. Please let me know if you can pull this as is or > if I should rebuild my branch and resend. This is fine - it's small, it's a one-time pain, and there's that reason for it. So as long as Andy is aware of how his patches got rebased and don't match his branch any more, I think it's not a big deal, and I've pulled it as-is. Linus
The pull request you sent on Tue, 9 Mar 2021 16:34:43 +0100:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brgl/linux.git tags/gpio-fixes-for-v5.12-rc3
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/4b3d9f9cf108ebf2c48fbbbf30a8d1346d9cc7d6
Thank you!
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 12:04:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 7:43 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > > > > I realized only after I sent out this PR that I had rebased the branch > > on top of v5.12-rc2 (because of the v5.12-rc1 situation) without > > --rebase-merges and this caused git to drop the merge commit for > > Andy's pull-request. Please let me know if you can pull this as is or > > if I should rebuild my branch and resend. > > This is fine - it's small, it's a one-time pain, and there's that reason for it. > > So as long as Andy is aware of how his patches got rebased and don't > match his branch any more, I think it's not a big deal, and I've > pulled it as-is. Thanks! It's not big deal, but a good learning anyway how to communicate and proceed with the git in such (rare I suppose) situations.