lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 18/57] iTCO: unlocked_ioctl, coding style and cleanup
    Date
    On Tuesday 20 May 2008 18:26:58 Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:06:25 +0100 Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
    wrote:
    > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_vendor.h | 15 ++
    > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_vendor_support.c | 53 +++---
    > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c | 294
    > > ++++++++++++++++----------------
    >
    > This runs afoul of git-watchdog and/or itco_wdt-ich9do-support.patch
    >
    > Hunk #1 succeeded at 66 (offset 1 line).
    > Hunk #3 FAILED at 139.
    > Hunk #4 FAILED at 158.
    > Hunk #5 FAILED at 201.
    > Hunk #6 FAILED at 222.
    > Hunk #7 FAILED at 246.
    > Hunk #8 succeeded at 374 (offset 12 lines).
    > Hunk #9 FAILED at 429.
    > Hunk #10 FAILED at 458.
    > Hunk #11 FAILED at 472.
    > Hunk #12 FAILED at 480.
    > Hunk #13 FAILED at 489.
    > Hunk #14 FAILED at 518.
    > Hunk #15 FAILED at 534.
    > Hunk #16 FAILED at 588.
    > Hunk #17 succeeded at 454 (offset -140 lines).
    > Hunk #18 FAILED at 475.
    > Hunk #19 succeeded at 669 (offset 27 lines).
    > Hunk #20 succeeded at 512 (offset -140 lines).
    > Hunk #21 FAILED at 534.
    > Hunk #22 succeeded at 814 (offset 29 lines).
    > 15 out of 22 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
    > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c.rej
    >
    > so I ducked this one.
    >
    > booke-watchdog-clean-up-and-unlocked_ioctl gets 8-out-of-ten against
    > watchdog-fix-booke_wdtc-on-mpc85xx-smp-system.patch so I ducked that one
    > too.
    >
    > w83697hf_wdt-cleanup-coding-style-and-switch-to-unlocked_ioctl gets
    > 4-of-17 against git-watchdog - also ducked.
    >
    >
    > The rest applied, although about half of them needed fixes because
    > Rusty has been running around fiddling with other peoples stuff
    > renaming down_trylock to down_nowait all over the tree.
    >
    > This means that the watchdog patches now have a Rusty dependency so I
    > NEED TO KNOW if those patches aren't for 2.6.27 or if they get nacked
    > or something.
    >
    > It also means that the patches which I queued cannot go into Wim's tree
    > as-is. If Wim queues the originals then it means that Stephen and/or
    > myself get to fix all the rejects again, and there'll be a
    > decent-sized smashup during the merge window. There are lessons
    > here...

    I've been pulling out s/down_trylock/down_nowait/ patches which effect others'
    changes. Those patches get moved to the end of my queue, and I'll revisit
    them before an actual merge with Linus.

    As down_trylock still works (but marked deprecated) with my patches, they're
    fine to drop. Just tell me which ones...

    Hope that helps,
    Rusty.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-05-21 06:29    [W:0.024 / U:2.744 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site