diff mbox series

[01/32] mfd: exynos-lpass: Use common soc/exynos-regs-pmu.h header

Message ID 20170410131823.26485-2-kishon@ti.com
State Accepted
Commit 0ccf7d87fb4a9dcbb55156c846e2593fe77c206b
Headers show
Series [01/32] mfd: exynos-lpass: Use common soc/exynos-regs-pmu.h header | expand

Commit Message

Kishon Vijay Abraham I April 10, 2017, 1:17 p.m. UTC
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>


The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from
exynos-regs-pmu.h.

Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>

---
 drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
2.11.0

Comments

Lee Jones April 11, 2017, 2:14 p.m. UTC | #1
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> 

> The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from

> exynos-regs-pmu.h.

> 

> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>

> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>



Okay, this is confusing.

I'm guessing you're sending this to Greg for inclusion into -stable?

Isn't there a way to specify this intention?

Also, patch 1 and 3 appear to be identical.

Not even sure how that's possible.

> Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>

> ---

>  drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c | 4 ++--

>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

> 

> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

> index 2e064fb8826f..8bebad92a385 100644

> --- a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

> +++ b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

> @@ -18,11 +18,11 @@

>  #include <linux/io.h>

>  #include <linux/module.h>

>  #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>

> -#include <linux/mfd/syscon/exynos5-pmu.h>

>  #include <linux/of.h>

>  #include <linux/of_platform.h>

>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>

>  #include <linux/regmap.h>

> +#include <linux/soc/samsung/exynos-regs-pmu.h>

>  #include <linux/types.h>

>  

>  /* LPASS Top register definitions */

> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void exynos_lpass_enable(struct exynos_lpass *lpass)

>  

>  	/* Activate related PADs from retention state */

>  	regmap_write(lpass->pmu, EXYNOS5433_PAD_RETENTION_AUD_OPTION,

> -		     EXYNOS5433_PAD_INITIATE_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);

> +		     EXYNOS_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);

>  

>  	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_I2S_SW_RESET);

>  	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_DMA_SW_RESET);

> -- 

> 2.11.0

> 


-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Greg Kroah-Hartman April 11, 2017, 2:20 p.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:14:07PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> 

> > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> > 

> > The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from

> > exynos-regs-pmu.h.

> > 

> > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>

> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> > Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

> 

> 

> Okay, this is confusing.

> 

> I'm guessing you're sending this to Greg for inclusion into -stable?


I have no idea, I dropped it and totally ignored it :)

Doesn't anyone read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt anymore (or
wherever the file moved to...)

greg k-h
Kishon Vijay Abraham I April 11, 2017, 2:24 p.m. UTC | #3
Hi,

On Tuesday 11 April 2017 07:44 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> 

>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

>>

>> The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from

>> exynos-regs-pmu.h.

>>

>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>

>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

>> Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

> 

> 

> Okay, this is confusing.

> 

> I'm guessing you're sending this to Greg for inclusion into -stable?


No, it's not for stable. It's for 4.12.
> 

> Isn't there a way to specify this intention?


The pull request (cover letter) specifies this intention.

-Kishon

> 

> Also, patch 1 and 3 appear to be identical.

> 

> Not even sure how that's possible.

> 

>> Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>

>> ---

>>  drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c | 4 ++--

>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

>>

>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

>> index 2e064fb8826f..8bebad92a385 100644

>> --- a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

>> @@ -18,11 +18,11 @@

>>  #include <linux/io.h>

>>  #include <linux/module.h>

>>  #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>

>> -#include <linux/mfd/syscon/exynos5-pmu.h>

>>  #include <linux/of.h>

>>  #include <linux/of_platform.h>

>>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>

>>  #include <linux/regmap.h>

>> +#include <linux/soc/samsung/exynos-regs-pmu.h>

>>  #include <linux/types.h>

>>  

>>  /* LPASS Top register definitions */

>> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void exynos_lpass_enable(struct exynos_lpass *lpass)

>>  

>>  	/* Activate related PADs from retention state */

>>  	regmap_write(lpass->pmu, EXYNOS5433_PAD_RETENTION_AUD_OPTION,

>> -		     EXYNOS5433_PAD_INITIATE_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);

>> +		     EXYNOS_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);

>>  

>>  	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_I2S_SW_RESET);

>>  	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_DMA_SW_RESET);

>> -- 

>> 2.11.0

>>

>
Lee Jones April 11, 2017, 4:34 p.m. UTC | #4
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> Hi,

> 

> On Tuesday 11 April 2017 07:44 PM, Lee Jones wrote:

> > On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> > 

> >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> >>

> >> The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from

> >> exynos-regs-pmu.h.

> >>

> >> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>

> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> >> Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

> >> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

> > 

> > 

> > Okay, this is confusing.

> > 

> > I'm guessing you're sending this to Greg for inclusion into -stable?

> 

> No, it's not for stable. It's for 4.12.


Then I'm totally confused, since this patch has already been applied,
which is obvious since I already signed it off?

> > Isn't there a way to specify this intention?

> 

> The pull request (cover letter) specifies this intention.


Great!  But you forgot to send it to me, doh!

Why are you sending patches with a pull-request?

> > Also, patch 1 and 3 appear to be identical.

> > 

> > Not even sure how that's possible.


Still have no idea how you managed to do this!

> >> Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>

> >> ---

> >>  drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c | 4 ++--

> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

> >>

> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

> >> index 2e064fb8826f..8bebad92a385 100644

> >> --- a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

> >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c

> >> @@ -18,11 +18,11 @@

> >>  #include <linux/io.h>

> >>  #include <linux/module.h>

> >>  #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>

> >> -#include <linux/mfd/syscon/exynos5-pmu.h>

> >>  #include <linux/of.h>

> >>  #include <linux/of_platform.h>

> >>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>

> >>  #include <linux/regmap.h>

> >> +#include <linux/soc/samsung/exynos-regs-pmu.h>

> >>  #include <linux/types.h>

> >>  

> >>  /* LPASS Top register definitions */

> >> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void exynos_lpass_enable(struct exynos_lpass *lpass)

> >>  

> >>  	/* Activate related PADs from retention state */

> >>  	regmap_write(lpass->pmu, EXYNOS5433_PAD_RETENTION_AUD_OPTION,

> >> -		     EXYNOS5433_PAD_INITIATE_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);

> >> +		     EXYNOS_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);

> >>  

> >>  	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_I2S_SW_RESET);

> >>  	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_DMA_SW_RESET);

> >>

> > 


-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Kishon Vijay Abraham I April 12, 2017, 5:19 a.m. UTC | #5
Hi,

On Tuesday 11 April 2017 10:04 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> 

>> Hi,

>>

>> On Tuesday 11 April 2017 07:44 PM, Lee Jones wrote:

>>> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

>>>

>>>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

>>>>

>>>> The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from

>>>> exynos-regs-pmu.h.

>>>>

>>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>

>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

>>>> Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

>>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

>>>

>>>

>>> Okay, this is confusing.

>>>

>>> I'm guessing you're sending this to Greg for inclusion into -stable?

>>

>> No, it's not for stable. It's for 4.12.

> 

> Then I'm totally confused, since this patch has already been applied,

> which is obvious since I already signed it off?


With your immutable branch applied to phy tree, it's going to be part of my
pull request too.
> 

>>> Isn't there a way to specify this intention?

>>

>> The pull request (cover letter) specifies this intention.

> 

> Great!  But you forgot to send it to me, doh!

> 

> Why are you sending patches with a pull-request?


Greg KH sometimes would like to take a look at the patches that are part of the
pull request. I've been practicing it for a long time.
> 

>>> Also, patch 1 and 3 appear to be identical.

>>>

>>> Not even sure how that's possible.

> 

> Still have no idea how you managed to do this!


I think first it got applied when I applied patches from local-next to next and
then I did a merge of your immutable branch.

Thanks
Kishon
Lee Jones April 12, 2017, 7:57 a.m. UTC | #6
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 April 2017 10:04 PM, Lee Jones wrote:

> > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> >> On Tuesday 11 April 2017 07:44 PM, Lee Jones wrote:

> >>> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

> >>>

> >>>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> >>>>

> >>>> The MFD-specific header will go away because it duplicates defines from

> >>>> exynos-regs-pmu.h.

> >>>>

> >>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>

> >>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

> >>>> Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

> >>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Okay, this is confusing.

> >>>

> >>> I'm guessing you're sending this to Greg for inclusion into -stable?

> >>

> >> No, it's not for stable. It's for 4.12.

> > 

> > Then I'm totally confused, since this patch has already been applied,

> > which is obvious since I already signed it off?

> 

> With your immutable branch applied to phy tree, it's going to be part of my

> pull request too.


Okay, now I understand.

> >>> Isn't there a way to specify this intention?

> >>

> >> The pull request (cover letter) specifies this intention.

> > 

> > Great!  But you forgot to send it to me, doh!

> > 

> > Why are you sending patches with a pull-request?

> 

> Greg KH sometimes would like to take a look at the patches that are part of the

> pull request. I've been practicing it for a long time.


It's a strange practice that I've not seen before.

IMHO, it displays a lack of trust for you as Maintainer.

Also, in Greg's words:

  "I have no idea, I dropped it and totally ignored it :)"

Might be worth stopping this particular practice.  If he really wants
to check the patches before pulling from you he can always `git log -p
<tag>` the patches from afar.

> >>> Also, patch 1 and 3 appear to be identical.

> >>>

> >>> Not even sure how that's possible.

> > 

> > Still have no idea how you managed to do this!

> 

> I think first it got applied when I applied patches from local-next to next and

> then I did a merge of your immutable branch.


Sounds like an odd pickle to find yourself in.

Might be worth reviewing the way you handle immutable branches.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c
index 2e064fb8826f..8bebad92a385 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/exynos-lpass.c
@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@ 
 #include <linux/io.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
-#include <linux/mfd/syscon/exynos5-pmu.h>
 #include <linux/of.h>
 #include <linux/of_platform.h>
 #include <linux/platform_device.h>
 #include <linux/regmap.h>
+#include <linux/soc/samsung/exynos-regs-pmu.h>
 #include <linux/types.h>
 
 /* LPASS Top register definitions */
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@  static void exynos_lpass_enable(struct exynos_lpass *lpass)
 
 	/* Activate related PADs from retention state */
 	regmap_write(lpass->pmu, EXYNOS5433_PAD_RETENTION_AUD_OPTION,
-		     EXYNOS5433_PAD_INITIATE_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);
+		     EXYNOS_WAKEUP_FROM_LOWPWR);
 
 	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_I2S_SW_RESET);
 	exynos_lpass_core_sw_reset(lpass, LPASS_DMA_SW_RESET);