From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:32:08 +0100
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 05:11:46PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> 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) {
>
> Whatever works best for everyone is fine for me, so ack from me.
Yeah I'm fine with this too.
