| Message ID | 1357666417-8803-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Stephen, On 08/01/2013 18:33, Stephen Warren wrote: > From: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> > > Commit 6bb27d7 "ARM: delete struct sys_timer" removed struct sys_timer, > but didn't update mach-sunxi/sunxi.c for this change, even though the > sunxi timer implementation itself was updated. This caused a build break: > > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c:94:2: error: unknown field 'timer' specified in initializer > arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c:94:12: error: 'sunxi_timer' undeclared here (not in a function) > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> > --- > Ideally, this commit would be squashed into 6bb27d7 in arm-soc's > timer-cleanup branch. However, that would change a few commit IDs, and > I've already pulled that branch into the Tegra and bcm2835 trees. I can > rebase those without issue if we co-ordinate so all the changes go into > the same linux-next version. > > However, since sunxi isn't actually enabled in any defconfig until > v3.8-rc2, perhaps it's OK to apply this change as a separate patch on > top of timer-rework, and ignore the bisect issue? I'm fine with having it as a follow-up patch. Also, you can add my Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> Since I assume that Olof will apply this directly? Maxime
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On 08/01/2013 18:33, Stephen Warren wrote: >> From: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> >> >> Commit 6bb27d7 "ARM: delete struct sys_timer" removed struct sys_timer, >> but didn't update mach-sunxi/sunxi.c for this change, even though the >> sunxi timer implementation itself was updated. This caused a build break: >> >> arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c:94:2: error: unknown field 'timer' specified in initializer >> arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c:94:12: error: 'sunxi_timer' undeclared here (not in a function) >> >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> >> --- >> Ideally, this commit would be squashed into 6bb27d7 in arm-soc's >> timer-cleanup branch. However, that would change a few commit IDs, and >> I've already pulled that branch into the Tegra and bcm2835 trees. I can >> rebase those without issue if we co-ordinate so all the changes go into >> the same linux-next version. >> >> However, since sunxi isn't actually enabled in any defconfig until >> v3.8-rc2, perhaps it's OK to apply this change as a separate patch on >> top of timer-rework, and ignore the bisect issue? > > I'm fine with having it as a follow-up patch. > > Also, you can add my > Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> > Since I assume that Olof will apply this directly? Yep, sorry I missed the reply -- I've already applied it actually. Should show up in next linux-next. -Olof
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c index 9be910f..cba4cd3 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-sunxi/sunxi.c @@ -91,6 +91,6 @@ DT_MACHINE_START(SUNXI_DT, "Allwinner A1X (Device Tree)") .init_irq = sunxi_init_irq, .handle_irq = sunxi_handle_irq, .restart = sunxi_restart, - .timer = &sunxi_timer, + .init_time = &sunxi_timer_init, .dt_compat = sunxi_board_dt_compat, MACHINE_END