On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:56:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 12:02:08 -0700 Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The SMD driver is reading and writing chunks of data to iomem, > > and there's an __iowrite32_copy() function for the writing part, but > > no __ioread32_copy() function for the reading part. This series > > adds __ioread32_copy() and uses it in two places. Andrew is on Cc in > > case this should go through the -mm tree. Otherwise the target > > of this patch series is SMD, so I've sent it to Andy. > > > > Note this patch series relies on a previous patch on the list that > > changes the readl() to __raw_readl() in the smd driver[1]. > > Well that's awkward. > > "[PATCH v2 6/8] soc: qcom: smd: Handle big endian CPUs" is one patch in > an eight-patch series. My usual approach would be to suck in the whole > series, stage it behind linux-next, drop patches if/when others merge > them into subsystem trees and thus retain all the dependencies for this > patch series in a maintainable-by-me fashion. > > But that 8-patch series doesn't apply: > > checking file drivers/soc/qcom/smd.c > Hunk #6 FAILED at 360. > Hunk #15 FAILED at 733. > Hunk #16 FAILED at 741. > 3 out of 19 hunks FAILED > Failed to apply soc-qcom-smd-handle-big-endian-cpus > > > ho hum. I think I'll go with plan B: merge just "lib: iomap_copy: Add > __ioread32_copy()" and send that into Linus promptly. That way you > guys can sort out the driver patches in the usual fashion. > I just pulled in the original 8 patches and rebased. My plans were to stage those in linux-next through my for-next. Then add those on top just like you specified. But i could go either way. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
