Please pull 'next' branch of 5xxx tree

Hi Ben,

please pull some mpc5xxx patches for linux-next. Thanks!

Anatolij

The following changes since commit 01e8ec4417d3c484986af0adaa0ae6632e0a59cd:

  powerpc: Fix power4/970 idle code regression with lockdep (2012-03-16 09:28:17 +1100)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.denx.de/linux-2.6-agust.git next

Andrea Gelmini (1):
      Documentation/powerpc/mpc52xx.txt: Checkpatch cleanup

Grant Likely (1):
      powerpc/5200: convert mpc5200 to use of_platform_populate()

Heiko Schocher (4):
      powerpc/mpc5200: update mpc5200_defconfig to fit for charon board
      powerpc/mpc52xx: setup port_config and CDM settings through DT
      powerpc/mpc52xx: add a4m072 board support
      powerpc/mpc5200: add options to mpc5200_defconfig

 .../devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/mpc5200.txt    |   17 ++
 Documentation/powerpc/mpc52xx.txt                  |   12 +-
 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/a4m072.dts                   |  168 ++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/powerpc/configs/mpc5200_defconfig             |   27 ++--
 arch/powerpc/platforms/52xx/mpc5200_simple.c       |    1 +
 arch/powerpc/platforms/52xx/mpc52xx_common.c       |   37 ++++-
 6 files changed, 236 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/a4m072.dts

Hi,

>       powerpc/mpc52xx: setup port_config and CDM settings through DT

Can we skip this patch for 3.5? Between posting it and pushing it upstream were
about 24 hours, so one didn't have much chance of reviewing (and no linux-next
exposure).

I think the bindings leave space for questions, e.g. is it really desirable to
have the fractional divide ratios encoded like in the bits in the register? Why
not encode it like e.g. <11 11 11 11> (the actual divisor) or so? I could
imagine there are examples for setting dividers somewhere. Poking values into
registers tends to be suspicious, so I'd vote for giving all this more
exposure.

Thanks,

   Wolfram

On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 23:30 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> >       powerpc/mpc52xx: setup port_config and CDM settings through DT
> 
> Can we skip this patch for 3.5? Between posting it and pushing it upstream were
> about 24 hours, so one didn't have much chance of reviewing (and no linux-next
> exposure).
> 
> I think the bindings leave space for questions, e.g. is it really desirable to
> have the fractional divide ratios encoded like in the bits in the register? Why
> not encode it like e.g. <11 11 11 11> (the actual divisor) or so? I could
> imagine there are examples for setting dividers somewhere. Poking values into
> registers tends to be suspicious, so I'd vote for giving all this more
> exposure.

I'll drop it from what I merge, thanks.

Anatolij, Can you organize with Stephen (CC) so that you tree is part of
linux-next for the next cycle ? Either that or make sure you send me
pull requests really early :-)

Cheers,
Ben.

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:32:21 +1100
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
...
> Anatolij, Can you organize with Stephen (CC) so that you tree is part of
> linux-next for the next cycle ? Either that or make sure you send me
> pull requests really early :-)

Yes. Stephen, could you please change linux-next to pull from my
mpc5xxx tree

 git://git.denx.de/linux-2.6-agust.git next

Thanks,
Anatolij

Hi,

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 23:30:17 +0100
Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> >       powerpc/mpc52xx: setup port_config and CDM settings through DT
> 
> Can we skip this patch for 3.5? Between posting it and pushing it upstream were
> about 24 hours, so one didn't have much chance of reviewing (and no linux-next
> exposure).

Pretty much similar patch was posted nearly one year ago, so my
assumption was that people have had enough time to comment on it :-).
But I've dropped this patch from the next branch for now.

> I think the bindings leave space for questions, e.g. is it really desirable to
> have the fractional divide ratios encoded like in the bits in the register? Why
> not encode it like e.g. <11 11 11 11> (the actual divisor) or so? I could
> imagine there are examples for setting dividers somewhere. Poking values into
> registers tends to be suspicious, so I'd vote for giving all this more
> exposure.

At the end we will be poking values into registers anyway :-),
but I'm open for suggestions and discussion about them.

Thanks,
Anatolij

Hi Anatolij,

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 01:18:30 +0100 Anatolij Gustschin <agust@denx.de> wrote:
>
> Yes. Stephen, could you please change linux-next to pull from my
> mpc5xxx tree
> 
>  git://git.denx.de/linux-2.6-agust.git next

I have replaced the 52xx-and-virtex tree with this (and called it simply
mpc5xxx).  I have also removed the 52xx-and-virtex-current tree.

Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
you may know, this is not a judgment of your code.  The purpose of
linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 

You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
been:
     * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
	Signed-off-by,
     * posted to the relevant mailing list,
     * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
     * successfully unit tested, and 
     * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.

Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.