From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: Antony Pavlov <antonynpavlov@gmail.com>
Cc: "barebox@lists.infradead.org" <barebox@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: ns16550: Rework driver to allow for x86 I/O space
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 18:20:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140405162016.GA27055@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140404221240.70e458aefc095d88290b1174@gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 10:12:40PM +0400, Antony Pavlov wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 18:52:46 +0200
> Michel Stam <michel@reverze.net> wrote:
>
> > Hello Antony,
> >
> > Sorry to hear that- the patch was not meant to add new functionality, merely preserve the status quo in master.
>
> Quite the contrary!
>
> Your patchseries introduces new functionality, it adds additional io space.
>
> In barebox maillist all new functionality patches are assumed to be 'next' branch patches.
>
> Only critical bugfixes and trivial changes can go to the 'master' branch directly.
>
> > To explain; add_ns16550_device() assumes that all ns16550 chips are mapped into memory. This is not so on the x86 platform. Previously, because no io-mapped resources were available, x86 created a "memory" device with custom IO routines. I rewrote this to use IORESOURCE_IO instead, but to do this, the invocation of the add_ns16550_device() needed to specify the resource type. The patch which conflicts with your patch can be undone as far as I'm concerned; I wasn't adding anything new to the mips/mach-xburst platform. I can redo the patch, leaving the file targeted by your patch unchanged if you like?
>
> IMHO you have to rebase your patches over the 'next' branch.
No, please base your patches on master. I'll resolve the merge conflicts
if necessary while merging the different for-next branches. Should there
be non-trivial conflicts it may happen that I explicitly ask you to base
your work on -next.
Right now the -next branch is empty, so this doesn't make a difference
at the moment.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-05 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-04 13:41 [PATCH 1/3] common: Allow for I/O mapped I/O michel
2014-04-04 13:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: Add support for IDE on the legacy I/O ports michel
2014-04-04 13:41 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: ns16550: Rework driver to allow for x86 I/O space michel
2014-04-04 15:56 ` Antony Pavlov
2014-04-04 16:52 ` Michel Stam
2014-04-04 18:12 ` Antony Pavlov
2014-04-04 18:11 ` Michel Stam
2014-04-05 16:20 ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140405162016.GA27055@pengutronix.de \
--to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=antonynpavlov@gmail.com \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox