Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] gpio: gpio-mxs: copy mach-mxs/gpio.c intodrivers/gpio

From: Grant Likely
Date: Mon Jun 06 2011 - 04:11:03 EST

Next message: Florian Fainelli: "[PATCH] x86/devicetree: add missing early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch stub"
Previous message: Lars TÃuber: "[PROBLEM] reproduceable storage errors on high IO load"
In reply to: Shawn Guo: "Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] gpio: gpio-mxs: copy mach-mxs/gpio.c intodrivers/gpio"
Next in thread: Shawn Guo: "[PATCH v3 2/3] gpio: gpio-mxs: make it work for Freescale MXS architecture"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 12:23:14AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 04:29:46PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 06:55:38PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > As the first patch of the series that moves mach-mxc gpio driver into
> > > drivers/gpio, it copies arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.c into
> > > drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c. The later patches will make necessary
> > > changes to the driver, migrate the existing users to it, and lastly
> > > deletes mach-mxs gpio driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c | 331 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > [sigh] I fear we are having a communication breakdown. Since your
> > /moving/ a file, you need to make it easy for readers to understand
> > what has changed and why. That means using 1 patch to move the file
> > with only the changes absolutely necessary to ensure bisectability,
> > and then followup patches for the clean up.
> >
> > Adding a new copy in one patch, and then removing the old copy in the
> > other patch does not make it easy for a reader to understand what
> > changed. Below is what you're first patch should look like (using the
> > -M flag to show the actual changes which are only #include differences).
> >
> Oops, I misunderstood your point. But one thing I have been trying
> hard is to keep changes for driver and subarch in separate patches,
> which is something I was asked to do when I started working with
> community.

Heh, and sometimes those of us actually maintaining stuff just plain
change our mind when we see what something actually looks like in
practise. :-)

In this case, the changes were intertwined enough that there wasn't
much benefit in keeping the arch and drivers stuff in separate
patches.

> As you will anyway pick up the patch set as a whole,
> this is not a problem then. I just sent the updates of gpio-mxs
> and gpio-mxc with you approach. As a side effect, you will see
> patch #2 of gpio-mxc becomes a very big patch in term of number of
> files it changes.

Thanks. It's actually not that big. I've seen (and created) much
worse.

>
> > I've build tested this patch and have it sitting in the gpio/next
> > branch of git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6 at the moment if you
> > want to build the rest of your series on top of it.
> >
> Thanks for the patch demonstrating. I have one minor comment below.
>
> > g.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > commit e084f5b06ca7f3d94d9d042d288a3311398e5c49
> > Author: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Sat Jun 4 16:18:59 2011 -0600
> >
> > gpio/mxs: Move Freescale mxs gpio driver to drivers/gpio
> >
> > GPIO drivers are getting moved to drivers/gpio for cleanup and
> > consolidation. This patch moves the mxs driver. Follow up patches
> > will clean it up and make it a fine upstanding example of a gpio
> > driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile | 2 +-
> > .../mach-mxs/{gpio.h => include/mach/gpio-mxs.h} | 0
> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 4 ++++
> > drivers/gpio/Makefile | 1 +
> > .../arm/mach-mxs/gpio.c => drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c | 3 +--
> > 6 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile
> > index 58e8923..6c38262 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile
> > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > # Common support
> > -obj-y := clock.o devices.o gpio.o icoll.o iomux.o system.o timer.o
> > +obj-y := clock.o devices.o icoll.o iomux.o system.o timer.o
> >
> > obj-$(CONFIG_MXS_OCOTP) += ocotp.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.h b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/gpio-mxs.h
> > similarity index 100%
> > rename from arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.h
> > rename to arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/gpio-mxs.h
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c
> > index eacdc6b..347cf35 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mx28evk.c
> > @@ -24,9 +24,9 @@
> >
> > #include <mach/common.h>
> > #include <mach/iomux-mx28.h>
> > +#include <mach/gpio-mxs.h>
> >
> This is the problem of existing code. The gpio.h (in turn gpio-mxs.h)
> does not need to be included here. So we can simply drop it in this
> patch. I have incorporated it when sending the patch within my series.

Oops, I missed you comment here and replied to one of your patches
with a nonsensical comment about missing a header. Sorry. Everything
should be in order in my tree now.

>
> > #include "devices-mx28.h"
> > -#include "gpio.h"
> >
> > #define MX28EVK_FLEXCAN_SWITCH MXS_GPIO_NR(2, 13)
> > #define MX28EVK_FEC_PHY_POWER MXS_GPIO_NR(2, 15)
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> > index 21271a5..afe44aa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> > @@ -94,6 +94,10 @@ config GPIO_EXYNOS4
> > def_bool y
> > depends on CPU_EXYNOS4210
> >
> > +config GPIO_MXS
> > + def_bool y
> > + depends on ARCH_MXS
> > +
> > config GPIO_PLAT_SAMSUNG
> > def_bool y
> > depends on SAMSUNG_GPIOLIB_4BIT
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Makefile b/drivers/gpio/Makefile
> > index e6e5032..8733d02 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/Makefile
> > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_BASIC_MMIO_CORE) += basic_mmio_gpio.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_BASIC_MMIO) += basic_mmio_gpio.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_EP93XX) += gpio-ep93xx.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_EXYNOS4) += gpio-exynos4.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_MXS) += gpio-mxs.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_PLAT_SAMSUNG) += gpio-plat-samsung.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_S5PC100) += gpio-s5pc100.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_S5PV210) += gpio-s5pv210.o
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c
> > similarity index 99%
> > rename from arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.c
> > rename to drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c
> > index 2c950fe..bac7b6b 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/gpio.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c
> > @@ -27,10 +27,9 @@
> > #include <linux/gpio.h>
> > #include <mach/mx23.h>
> > #include <mach/mx28.h>
> > +#include <mach/gpio-mxs.h>
> > #include <asm-generic/bug.h>
> >
> > -#include "gpio.h"
> > -
> > static struct mxs_gpio_port *mxs_gpio_ports;
> > static int gpio_table_size;
> >
>
> --
> Regards,
> Shawn
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Florian Fainelli: "[PATCH] x86/devicetree: add missing early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch stub"
Previous message: Lars TÃuber: "[PROBLEM] reproduceable storage errors on high IO load"
In reply to: Shawn Guo: "Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] gpio: gpio-mxs: copy mach-mxs/gpio.c intodrivers/gpio"
Next in thread: Shawn Guo: "[PATCH v3 2/3] gpio: gpio-mxs: make it work for Freescale MXS architecture"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]