On 3 November 2014 03:17, Wang, Yalin <Yalin.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Will Deacon [mailto:will.deacon@xxxxxxx] >> > +#ifndef __ASM_ARM64_BITREV_H >> > +#define __ASM_ARM64_BITREV_H >> >> Really minor nit, but we don't tend to include 'ARM64' in our header guards, >> so this should just be __ASM_BITREV_H. >> >> With that change, >> >> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> >> > I have send the patch to the patch system: > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/search.php?uid=4025 > > 8187/1 8188/1 8189/1 > > Just remind you that , should also cherry-pick Joe Perches's > 2 patches: > [PATCH] 6fire: Convert byte_rev_table uses to bitrev8 > [PATCH] carl9170: Convert byte_rev_table uses to bitrev8 > > To make sure there is no build error when build these 2 drivers. > If this is the case, I suggest you update patch 8187/1 to retain the byte_rev_table symbol, even in the accelerated case, and remove it with a followup patch once Joe's patches have landed upstream. Also, a link to the patches would be nice, and perhaps a bit of explanation how/when they are expected to be merged. -- Ard. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>