Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c between commit 3888c09074db ("rtc: sa1100:
declare irq in resource") from the arm-soc tree and commit "drivers/rtc:
remove IRQF_DISABLED" from the akpm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
diff --cc drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
index c105774,e70b4e6..0000000
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
@@@ -102,23 -156,20 +102,23 @@@ static irqreturn_t sa1100_rtc_interrupt
static int sa1100_rtc_open(struct device *dev)
{
+ struct sa1100_rtc *info = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+ struct rtc_device *rtc = info->rtc;
int ret;
- struct platform_device *plat_dev = to_platform_device(dev);
- struct rtc_device *rtc = platform_get_drvdata(plat_dev);
- ret = request_irq(IRQ_RTC1Hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
+ ret = clk_prepare_enable(info->clk);
+ if (ret)
+ goto fail_clk;
- ret = request_irq(info->irq_1hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
++ ret = request_irq(info->irq_1hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
"rtc 1Hz", dev);
if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", IRQ_RTC1Hz);
+ dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", info->irq_1hz);
goto fail_ui;
}
- ret = request_irq(info->irq_alarm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
- ret = request_irq(IRQ_RTCAlrm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
++ ret = request_irq(info->irq_alarm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
"rtc Alrm", dev);
if (ret) {
- dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", IRQ_RTCAlrm);
+ dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", info->irq_alarm);
goto fail_ai;
}
rtc->max_user_freq = RTC_FREQ;
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 05:21:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c between commit 3888c09074db ("rtc: sa1100:
> declare irq in resource") from the arm-soc tree and commit "drivers/rtc:
> remove IRQF_DISABLED" from the akpm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
Your fix looks good to me.
Thanks,
Yong
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>
> diff --cc drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
> index c105774,e70b4e6..0000000
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
> @@@ -102,23 -156,20 +102,23 @@@ static irqreturn_t sa1100_rtc_interrupt
>
> static int sa1100_rtc_open(struct device *dev)
> {
> + struct sa1100_rtc *info = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = info->rtc;
> int ret;
> - struct platform_device *plat_dev = to_platform_device(dev);
> - struct rtc_device *rtc = platform_get_drvdata(plat_dev);
>
> - ret = request_irq(IRQ_RTC1Hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(info->clk);
> + if (ret)
> + goto fail_clk;
> - ret = request_irq(info->irq_1hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
> ++ ret = request_irq(info->irq_1hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> "rtc 1Hz", dev);
> if (ret) {
> - dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", IRQ_RTC1Hz);
> + dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", info->irq_1hz);
> goto fail_ui;
> }
> - ret = request_irq(info->irq_alarm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
> - ret = request_irq(IRQ_RTCAlrm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> ++ ret = request_irq(info->irq_alarm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> "rtc Alrm", dev);
> if (ret) {
> - dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", IRQ_RTCAlrm);
> + dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", info->irq_alarm);
> goto fail_ai;
> }
> rtc->max_user_freq = RTC_FREQ;
--
Only stand for myself
Hi Stephen & Arnd,
Since there's the conflict on code. Does it mean that I need to re-submit those patches in arm-soc that should be based on commit "drivers/rtc: remove IRQF_DISABLED" from the akpm tree?
Best Regards
Haojian
________________________________________
From: Yong Zhang [[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:32 PM
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Andrew Morton; [email protected]; [email protected]; Haojian Zhuang; Olof Johansson; Arnd Bergmann; [email protected]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the arm-soc tree
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 05:21:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c between commit 3888c09074db ("rtc: sa1100:
> declare irq in resource") from the arm-soc tree and commit "drivers/rtc:
> remove IRQF_DISABLED" from the akpm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
Your fix looks good to me.
Thanks,
Yong
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>
> diff --cc drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
> index c105774,e70b4e6..0000000
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c
> @@@ -102,23 -156,20 +102,23 @@@ static irqreturn_t sa1100_rtc_interrupt
>
> static int sa1100_rtc_open(struct device *dev)
> {
> + struct sa1100_rtc *info = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + struct rtc_device *rtc = info->rtc;
> int ret;
> - struct platform_device *plat_dev = to_platform_device(dev);
> - struct rtc_device *rtc = platform_get_drvdata(plat_dev);
>
> - ret = request_irq(IRQ_RTC1Hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(info->clk);
> + if (ret)
> + goto fail_clk;
> - ret = request_irq(info->irq_1hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
> ++ ret = request_irq(info->irq_1hz, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> "rtc 1Hz", dev);
> if (ret) {
> - dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", IRQ_RTC1Hz);
> + dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", info->irq_1hz);
> goto fail_ui;
> }
> - ret = request_irq(info->irq_alarm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
> - ret = request_irq(IRQ_RTCAlrm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> ++ ret = request_irq(info->irq_alarm, sa1100_rtc_interrupt, 0,
> "rtc Alrm", dev);
> if (ret) {
> - dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", IRQ_RTCAlrm);
> + dev_err(dev, "IRQ %d already in use.\n", info->irq_alarm);
> goto fail_ai;
> }
> rtc->max_user_freq = RTC_FREQ;
--
Only stand for myself
Hi,
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:54:06 -0800 Haojian Zhuang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Since there's the conflict on code. Does it mean that I need to re-submit
> those patches in arm-soc that should be based on commit "drivers/rtc:
> remove IRQF_DISABLED" from the akpm tree?
No, that conflict can be resolved by Linus during the next merge window
(unless someone else wants to do something about it).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]