Hi Dave,
Today's linux-next merge of the cpufreq tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpufreq.c between commit 7d30e8b3815f ("ARM:
EXYNOS4: Add EXYNOS4 CPU initialization support") from the s5p tree and
commit 44033b9c940e ([CPUFREQ] Remove the pm_message_t argument from
driver suspend"") from the cpufreq tree (where this file is called
arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/cpufreq.c).
Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
necessary.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
diff --cc arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpufreq.c
index a16ac35,7c08ad7..0000000
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpufreq.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpufreq.c
@@@ -452,8 -458,7 +452,7 @@@ static int exynos4_target(struct cpufre
}
#ifdef CONFIG_PM
- static int exynos4_cpufreq_suspend(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
- pm_message_t pmsg)
-static int s5pv310_cpufreq_suspend(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
++static int exynos4_cpufreq_suspend(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
return 0;
}
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 01:35:42PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the cpufreq tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpufreq.c between commit 7d30e8b3815f ("ARM:
> EXYNOS4: Add EXYNOS4 CPU initialization support") from the s5p tree and
> commit 44033b9c940e ([CPUFREQ] Remove the pm_message_t argument from
> driver suspend"") from the cpufreq tree (where this file is called
> arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/cpufreq.c).
>
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.
Yep, Looks fine to me. thanks.
Dave
Hi all,
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:35:42 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
Please do not reply to the sender address on the preceding email (the
ibm.com one), please reply to this one instead. Sorry for the
inconvenience.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Dave Jones wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 01:35:42PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the cpufreq tree got a conflict in
> > arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpufreq.c between commit 7d30e8b3815f ("ARM:
> > EXYNOS4: Add EXYNOS4 CPU initialization support") from the s5p tree and
> > commit 44033b9c940e ([CPUFREQ] Remove the pm_message_t argument from
> > driver suspend"") from the cpufreq tree (where this file is called
> > arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/cpufreq.c).
> >
> > Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix
as
> > necessary.
>
> Yep, Looks fine to me. thanks.
>
> Dave
Of course, it's ok to me too.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:35:42 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >
>
> Please do not reply to the sender address on the preceding email (the
> ibm.com one), please reply to this one instead. Sorry for the
> inconvenience.
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Oops, sorry. I did :(
I read this after that.
Sorry for bothering....
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.