On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 12:11 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 07/22/2011 12:04 PM, Jonas Bonn wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 16:05 +0200, Jonas Bonn wrote: > >> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> With a non-constant 8-bit argument, a call to udelay() generates a warning: > >> > > <snip> > > > >> --- > >> > >> Here's a patch that should resolve the merge conflict. This applies > >> Andrew's changes on top of the new asm-generic/delay.h instead of the x86 > >> arch-specific one. I've tested this for OpenRISC and the changed macros > >> don't cause any problems there. > >> > >> Let me know if this is OK and I'll throw it into the OpenRISC tree together > >> with the other delay.h modifications. > >> > > > > I haven't gotten any feedback on this... since the change looks > > appropriate to merge with the other changes to asm-generic/delay.h, I'll > > apply this patch there and carry the patch together with the other > > asm-generic/delay.h changes in the 'openrisc' tree. Andrew can drop the > > patch from his series to avoid the merge conflict. > > > > I hope that works for everybody... > > > > You may want to Cc: Arnd on this, since he's the asm-generic maintainer. > > Otherwise, since this is zero work on our part, it obviously works for me. > Good idea! CC:ing Arnd, too... Arnd has already reviewed the changes to delay.h. This is only about getting Andrew's fixes out of his tree where they cause a merge conflict and into asm-generic/delay.h where they belong. Thanks, Jonas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html