2023-10-19 05:06:36

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the gpio-brgl-fixes tree

---

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the gpio-brgl tree got a conflict in:

drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c

between commit:

fc363413ef8e ("gpio: vf610: set value before the direction to avoid a glitch")

from the gpio-brgl-fixes tree and commit:

b57587f11f81 ("gpio: vf610: simplify code by dropping data check")

from the gpio-brgl tree.

I fixed it up (see below) 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.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
index 656d6b1dddb5,a89ae84a1fa0..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
@@@ -126,9 -140,7 +140,9 @@@ static int vf610_gpio_direction_output(
unsigned long mask = BIT(gpio);
u32 val;

+ vf610_gpio_set(chip, gpio, value);
+
- if (port->sdata && port->sdata->have_paddr) {
+ if (port->sdata->have_paddr) {
val = vf610_gpio_readl(port->gpio_base + GPIO_PDDR);
val |= mask;
vf610_gpio_writel(val, port->gpio_base + GPIO_PDDR);

---

Attachments:

(No filename) (499.00 B)
OpenPGP digital signature

2023-10-19 08:42:09

by Bartosz Golaszewski

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the gpio-brgl-fixes tree

---

On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 at 07:06, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the gpio-brgl tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
>
> between commit:
>
> fc363413ef8e ("gpio: vf610: set value before the direction to avoid a glitch")
>
> from the gpio-brgl-fixes tree and commit:
>
> b57587f11f81 ("gpio: vf610: simplify code by dropping data check")
>
> from the gpio-brgl tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
> index 656d6b1dddb5,a89ae84a1fa0..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-vf610.c
> @@@ -126,9 -140,7 +140,9 @@@ static int vf610_gpio_direction_output(
> unsigned long mask = BIT(gpio);
> u32 val;
>
> + vf610_gpio_set(chip, gpio, value);
> +
> - if (port->sdata && port->sdata->have_paddr) {
> + if (port->sdata->have_paddr) {
> val = vf610_gpio_readl(port->gpio_base + GPIO_PDDR);
> val |= mask;
> vf610_gpio_writel(val, port->gpio_base + GPIO_PDDR);

Thanks Stephen, this is correct.

My for-next tree is currently rebased on top of v6.6-rc1 while the
fixes tree tracks Linus' master.

Once the fixes are upstream, I may just rebase my for-next tree.

Bart