Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the gpio tree got a conflict in: drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c between commit: 8959b304c706 ("gpiolib: Fix irq_disable() semantics") from Linus' tree and commit: a0b66a73785c ("gpio: Rename variable in core APIs") from the gpio tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell diff --cc drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c index 00fb91feba70,c2cc437ce831..000000000000 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c @@@ -2304,25 -2443,18 +2443,25 @@@ static void gpiochip_irq_enable(struct static void gpiochip_irq_disable(struct irq_data *d) { - struct gpio_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d); + struct gpio_chip *gc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d); + /* + * Since we override .irq_disable() we need to mimic the + * behaviour of __irq_disable() in irq/chip.c. + * First call .irq_disable() if it exists, else mimic the + * behaviour of mask_irq() which calls .irq_mask() if + * it exists. + */ - if (chip->irq.irq_disable) - chip->irq.irq_disable(d); - else if (chip->irq.chip->irq_mask) - chip->irq.chip->irq_mask(d); - gpiochip_disable_irq(chip, d->hwirq); + if (gc->irq.irq_disable) + gc->irq.irq_disable(d); - else ++ else if (gc->irq.chip->irq_mask) + gc->irq.chip->irq_mask(d); + gpiochip_disable_irq(gc, d->hwirq); } - static void gpiochip_set_irq_hooks(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip) + static void gpiochip_set_irq_hooks(struct gpio_chip *gc) { - struct irq_chip *irqchip = gpiochip->irq.chip; + struct irq_chip *irqchip = gc->irq.chip; if (!irqchip->irq_request_resources && !irqchip->irq_release_resources) {
Attachment:
pgpG_qebtkwTI.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature