Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got conflicts in:
drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/rtw_android.h
drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/rtw_android.c
between commit:
89939e890605 ("staging: rtlwifi: use siocdevprivate")
from the net-next tree and commit:
2b42bd58b321 ("staging: r8188eu: introduce new os_dep dir for RTL8188eu driver")
from the staging tree.
I fixed it up using the net-next version and can carry the fix as
necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider
cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
particularly complex conflicts.
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 00:33, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got conflicts in:
>
> drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/rtw_android.h
> drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/rtw_android.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 89939e890605 ("staging: rtlwifi: use siocdevprivate")
>
> from the net-next tree and commit:
>
> 2b42bd58b321 ("staging: r8188eu: introduce new os_dep dir for RTL8188eu driver")
>
> from the staging tree.
>
> I fixed it up using the net-next version and can carry the fix as
> necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
> non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
> when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider
> cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
> particularly complex conflicts.
Dear Mark,
Thank you for your e-mail - not sure what is going on here as the
r8188eu files are totally new - the net-next commit is touching files
from a different directory (rtl8188eu) so perhaps it is getting
confused and considering it a rename or similar? Regardless, all
commits for r8188eu subdirectory should come from staging, as it is a
different driver.
Regards,
Phil
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 10:57 AM Phillip Potter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 00:33, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your e-mail - not sure what is going on here as the
> r8188eu files are totally new - the net-next commit is touching files
> from a different directory (rtl8188eu) so perhaps it is getting
> confused and considering it a rename or similar? Regardless, all
> commits for r8188eu subdirectory should come from staging, as it is a
> different driver.
In net-next, the .ndo_do_ioctl() callback behaves differently, as it no
longer gets called from user space. If you have any
SIOCDEVPRIVATE ioctls in the driver, those need to be
moved over to the new .ndo_siocdevprivate callback, while any
nonstandard ioctl commands outside of that range can just be
removed.
Arnd
Hi all,
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:29 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 10:57 AM Phillip Potter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 00:33, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for your e-mail - not sure what is going on here as the
> > r8188eu files are totally new - the net-next commit is touching files
> > from a different directory (rtl8188eu) so perhaps it is getting
> > confused and considering it a rename or similar? Regardless, all
> > commits for r8188eu subdirectory should come from staging, as it is a
> > different driver.
>
> In net-next, the .ndo_do_ioctl() callback behaves differently, as it no
> longer gets called from user space. If you have any
> SIOCDEVPRIVATE ioctls in the driver, those need to be
> moved over to the new .ndo_siocdevprivate callback, while any
> nonstandard ioctl commands outside of that range can just be
> removed.
So, can that be done in the staging tree as it is, or does Greg need to
merge (part of) the net-next tree? Or will someone just supply me with
a reasonable merge resolution patch? Or does Greg reset the staging
tree to 5c872e1d2595 and try again next time? Or similar for Dave
(revert Arnd's work)?
Currently it is a mess in linux-next and probably will not work even
though it does build.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 08:55, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:29 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 10:57 AM Phillip Potter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 00:33, Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you for your e-mail - not sure what is going on here as the
> > > r8188eu files are totally new - the net-next commit is touching files
> > > from a different directory (rtl8188eu) so perhaps it is getting
> > > confused and considering it a rename or similar? Regardless, all
> > > commits for r8188eu subdirectory should come from staging, as it is a
> > > different driver.
> >
> > In net-next, the .ndo_do_ioctl() callback behaves differently, as it no
> > longer gets called from user space. If you have any
> > SIOCDEVPRIVATE ioctls in the driver, those need to be
> > moved over to the new .ndo_siocdevprivate callback, while any
> > nonstandard ioctl commands outside of that range can just be
> > removed.
>
> So, can that be done in the staging tree as it is, or does Greg need to
> merge (part of) the net-next tree? Or will someone just supply me with
> a reasonable merge resolution patch? Or does Greg reset the staging
> tree to 5c872e1d2595 and try again next time? Or similar for Dave
> (revert Arnd's work)?
>
> Currently it is a mess in linux-next and probably will not work even
> though it does build.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Dear Stephen,
Happy to try and provide a merge resolution patch if that is easier?
Will be this evening UK time though.
Regards,
Phil
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 2:48 PM Phillip Potter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 08:55, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:29 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > So, can that be done in the staging tree as it is, or does Greg need to
> > merge (part of) the net-next tree? Or will someone just supply me with
> > a reasonable merge resolution patch? Or does Greg reset the staging
> > tree to 5c872e1d2595 and try again next time? Or similar for Dave
> > (revert Arnd's work)?
> >
> > Currently it is a mess in linux-next and probably will not work even
> > though it does build.
> >
>
> Happy to try and provide a merge resolution patch if that is easier?
> Will be this evening UK time though.
Most likely there is no user space that actually wants this function at all,
so I think the easiest way would be to remove all of rtw_ioctl in the
staging tree version of this driver.
Arnd
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 21:00, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 2:48 PM Phillip Potter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 08:55, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:29 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > So, can that be done in the staging tree as it is, or does Greg need to
> > > merge (part of) the net-next tree? Or will someone just supply me with
> > > a reasonable merge resolution patch? Or does Greg reset the staging
> > > tree to 5c872e1d2595 and try again next time? Or similar for Dave
> > > (revert Arnd's work)?
> > >
> > > Currently it is a mess in linux-next and probably will not work even
> > > though it does build.
> > >
> >
> > Happy to try and provide a merge resolution patch if that is easier?
> > Will be this evening UK time though.
>
> Most likely there is no user space that actually wants this function at all,
> so I think the easiest way would be to remove all of rtw_ioctl in the
> staging tree version of this driver.
>
> Arnd
Sounds good. I will put something together to take out rtw_ioctl in
that case, and submit through Greg/linux-staging. Many thanks.
Regards,
Phil