Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
between commit:
68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
from the arm-soc tree and commit:
8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
from the pci 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 arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
index 8e8a77eb596a,71d7c6949b9e..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
@@@ -611,6 -594,89 +611,58 @@@
#thermal-sensor-cells = <1>;
};
- thermal-zones {
- core-cluster {
- polling-delay-passive = <1000>;
- polling-delay = <5000>;
- thermal-sensors = <&tmu 0>;
-
- trips {
- core_cluster_alert: core-cluster-alert {
- temperature = <85000>;
- hysteresis = <2000>;
- type = "passive";
- };
-
- core_cluster_crit: core-cluster-crit {
- temperature = <95000>;
- hysteresis = <2000>;
- type = "critical";
- };
- };
-
- cooling-maps {
- map0 {
- trip = <&core_cluster_alert>;
- cooling-device =
- <&cpu0 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>,
- <&cpu1 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>;
- };
- };
- };
- };
-
+ pcie@3400000 {
+ compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-pcie";
+ reg = <0x00 0x03400000 0x0 0x00100000 /* controller registers */
+ 0x80 0x00000000 0x0 0x00002000>; /* configuration space */
+ reg-names = "regs", "config";
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 108 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, /* PME interrupt */
+ <GIC_SPI 109 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; /* aer interrupt */
+ interrupt-names = "pme", "aer";
+ #address-cells = <3>;
+ #size-cells = <2>;
+ device_type = "pci";
+ dma-coherent;
+ num-viewport = <8>;
+ bus-range = <0x0 0xff>;
+ ranges = <0x81000000 0x0 0x00000000 0x80 0x00010000 0x0 0x00010000 /* downstream I/O */
+ 0x82000000 0x0 0x40000000 0x80 0x40000000 0x0 0x40000000>; /* non-prefetchable memory */
+ msi-parent = <&its>;
+ #interrupt-cells = <1>;
+ interrupt-map-mask = <0 0 0 7>;
+ interrupt-map = <0000 0 0 1 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 109 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <0000 0 0 2 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 110 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <0000 0 0 3 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 111 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <0000 0 0 4 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 112 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
+
+ pcie@3500000 {
+ compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-pcie";
+ reg = <0x00 0x03500000 0x0 0x00100000 /* controller registers */
+ 0x88 0x00000000 0x0 0x00002000>; /* configuration space */
+ reg-names = "regs", "config";
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 113 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <GIC_SPI 114 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ interrupt-names = "pme", "aer";
+ #address-cells = <3>;
+ #size-cells = <2>;
+ device_type = "pci";
+ dma-coherent;
+ num-viewport = <8>;
+ bus-range = <0x0 0xff>;
+ ranges = <0x81000000 0x0 0x00000000 0x88 0x00010000 0x0 0x00010000 /* downstream I/O */
+ 0x82000000 0x0 0x40000000 0x88 0x40000000 0x0 0x40000000>; /* non-prefetchable memory */
+ msi-parent = <&its>;
+ #interrupt-cells = <1>;
+ interrupt-map-mask = <0 0 0 7>;
+ interrupt-map = <0000 0 0 1 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 114 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <0000 0 0 2 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 115 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <0000 0 0 3 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 116 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <0000 0 0 4 &gic 0 0 GIC_SPI 117 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
+
pcie@1f0000000 { /* Integrated Endpoint Root Complex */
compatible = "pci-host-ecam-generic";
reg = <0x01 0xf0000000 0x0 0x100000>;
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
>
> between commit:
>
> 68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
>
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>
> 8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
Bjorn, we ask that driver subsystem maintainers don't pick up DT
changes since it causes conflicts like these.
Is it easy for you to drop this patch, or are we stuck with it?
Ideally it should never have been sent to you in the first place. :(
-Olof
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:27:20AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
> >
> > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> >
> > 8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
>
> Bjorn, we ask that driver subsystem maintainers don't pick up DT
> changes since it causes conflicts like these.
>
> Is it easy for you to drop this patch, or are we stuck with it?
> Ideally it should never have been sent to you in the first place. :(
Lorenzo, is it feasible for you to drop it from your pci/layerscape
branch and repush it? If so, I can redo the merge into my "next"
branch.
Bjorn
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 03:18:01PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:27:20AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > > 68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
> > >
> > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > >
> > > 8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
> >
> > Bjorn, we ask that driver subsystem maintainers don't pick up DT
> > changes since it causes conflicts like these.
> >
> > Is it easy for you to drop this patch, or are we stuck with it?
> > Ideally it should never have been sent to you in the first place. :(
>
> Lorenzo, is it feasible for you to drop it from your pci/layerscape
> branch and repush it? If so, I can redo the merge into my "next"
> branch.
Done. Should we ignore all dts updates from now onwards ?
Thanks,
Lorenzo
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 5:07 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 03:18:01PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:27:20AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > >
> > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
> > > >
> > > > between commit:
> > > >
> > > > 68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
> > > >
> > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > >
> > > > 8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
> > >
> > > Bjorn, we ask that driver subsystem maintainers don't pick up DT
> > > changes since it causes conflicts like these.
> > >
> > > Is it easy for you to drop this patch, or are we stuck with it?
> > > Ideally it should never have been sent to you in the first place. :(
> >
> > Lorenzo, is it feasible for you to drop it from your pci/layerscape
> > branch and repush it? If so, I can redo the merge into my "next"
> > branch.
>
> Done. ...
Thanks, I updated my "next" branch to incorporate this.
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 3:07 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 03:18:01PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:27:20AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > >
> > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
> > > >
> > > > between commit:
> > > >
> > > > 68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
> > > >
> > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > >
> > > > 8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
> > >
> > > Bjorn, we ask that driver subsystem maintainers don't pick up DT
> > > changes since it causes conflicts like these.
> > >
> > > Is it easy for you to drop this patch, or are we stuck with it?
> > > Ideally it should never have been sent to you in the first place. :(
> >
> > Lorenzo, is it feasible for you to drop it from your pci/layerscape
> > branch and repush it? If so, I can redo the merge into my "next"
> > branch.
>
> Done. Should we ignore all dts updates from now onwards ?
Thanks!
Indeed, dts updates should only go in through the platform maintainers
(i.e. through soc tree), unless there are strong reasons to bring them
in through driver trees.
If there's a need for a dt-include to be shared between driver and
dts, getting them on a stable branch that's merged through both trees
is usually the best way. Reach out when that happens and we can
coordinate.
Regards,
-Olof