On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 08:44:20AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Dave, Sam:
>
> should I just apply a version of Rob's tree that takes the refactoring
> into account to the dma-mapping tree? That way we should get the right
> result independent of the merge order.
E.g. something like the patch below:
--
>From 6ee3d6c39a0c8bc4b58fa601bb4370bdec785be7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:09:58 +0100
Subject: sparc: use DT node full_name in sparc_dma_alloc_resource
The sparc tree already has this change for the pre-refactored code,
but pulling it into the dma-mapping tree like this should ease
the merge conflicts a bit.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
---
arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c
index 51c128d80193..baa235652c27 100644
--- a/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c
+++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ unsigned long sparc_dma_alloc_resource(struct device *dev, size_t len)
res = kzalloc(sizeof(*res), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!res)
return 0;
- res->name = dev->of_node->name;
+ res->name = dev->of_node->full_name;
if (allocate_resource(&_sparc_dvma, res, len, _sparc_dvma.start,
_sparc_dvma.end, PAGE_SIZE, NULL, NULL) != 0) {
--
2.19.2
