diff mbox

[1/1] pinctrl/at91: fix compatible order

Message ID 1350033790-31028-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Oct. 12, 2012, 9:23 a.m. UTC
the sam9x5 is new version of the rm9200 not the invert

Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Ludovic Desroches Oct. 12, 2012, 2:04 p.m. UTC | #1
Le 10/12/2012 11:23 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD a écrit :
> the sam9x5 is new version of the rm9200 not the invert
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> ---
>   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c |    2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> index 9c0fe11..bdb152b 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> @@ -1331,8 +1331,8 @@ static void __devinit at91_gpio_probe_fixup(void)
>   }
>
>   static struct of_device_id at91_gpio_of_match[] __devinitdata = {
> -	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops },
>   	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9x5-gpio", .data = &at91sam9x5_ops, },
> +	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops },
>   	{ /* sentinel */ }
>   };
>
>


Do it also for at91_pinctrl_of_match[], there is the same issue.

Regards

Ludovic
Linus Walleij Oct. 15, 2012, 12:33 p.m. UTC | #2
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:04 PM, ludovic.desroches
<ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> wrote:
> Le 10/12/2012 11:23 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD a écrit :
>
>> the sam9x5 is new version of the rm9200 not the invert
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c |    2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
>> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
>> index 9c0fe11..bdb152b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
>> @@ -1331,8 +1331,8 @@ static void __devinit at91_gpio_probe_fixup(void)
>>   }
>>
>>   static struct of_device_id at91_gpio_of_match[] __devinitdata = {
>> -       { .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops
>> },
>>         { .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9x5-gpio", .data = &at91sam9x5_ops,
>> },
>> +       { .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops
>> },
>>         { /* sentinel */ }
>>   };
>>
>
> Do it also for at91_pinctrl_of_match[], there is the same issue.

Shall I apply this patch to my at91 branch or will it be updated to
cover both cases?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Oct. 15, 2012, 1:32 p.m. UTC | #3
On 14:33 Mon 15 Oct     , Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:04 PM, ludovic.desroches
> <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> wrote:
> > Le 10/12/2012 11:23 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD a écrit :
> >
> >> the sam9x5 is new version of the rm9200 not the invert
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> >> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c |    2 +-
> >>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> >> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> >> index 9c0fe11..bdb152b 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
> >> @@ -1331,8 +1331,8 @@ static void __devinit at91_gpio_probe_fixup(void)
> >>   }
> >>
> >>   static struct of_device_id at91_gpio_of_match[] __devinitdata = {
> >> -       { .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops
> >> },
> >>         { .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9x5-gpio", .data = &at91sam9x5_ops,
> >> },
> >> +       { .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops
> >> },
> >>         { /* sentinel */ }
> >>   };
> >>
> >
> > Do it also for at91_pinctrl_of_match[], there is the same issue.
> 
> Shall I apply this patch to my at91 branch or will it be updated to
> cover both cases?
the one in your tree is ok

Best Regards,
J.
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
index 9c0fe11..bdb152b 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91.c
@@ -1331,8 +1331,8 @@  static void __devinit at91_gpio_probe_fixup(void)
 }
 
 static struct of_device_id at91_gpio_of_match[] __devinitdata = {
-	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops },
 	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9x5-gpio", .data = &at91sam9x5_ops, },
+	{ .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-gpio", .data = &at91rm9200_ops },
 	{ /* sentinel */ }
 };