Hi all,
On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 22:32:16 +0000 broonie@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pinctrl tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 0d872ed9e2148 ("pinctrl: starfive: Move PM device over to irq domain")
>
> from the irqchip tree and commit:
>
> 64fd52a4d3ce6 ("pinctrl: starfive: Use a static name for the GPIO irq_chip")
>
> from the pinctrl 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.
>
> diff --cc drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c
> index 5be9866c2b3c0,0e4ff4c709f87..0000000000000
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-starfive.c
> @@@ -1307,8 -1308,8 +1308,6 @@@ static int starfive_probe(struct platfo
> sfp->gc.base = -1;
> sfp->gc.ngpio = NR_GPIOS;
>
> - starfive_irq_chip.name = sfp->gc.label;
> - starfive_irq_chip.parent_device = dev;
> --
> sfp->gc.irq.chip = &starfive_irq_chip;
> sfp->gc.irq.parent_handler = starfive_gpio_irq_handler;
> sfp->gc.irq.num_parents = 1;
This is now a conflict between the irqchip tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpfY324bPOW0.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
