Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: Exynos: fix SDHCI device names in regulator definitions

2012-03-06 Thread Kyungmin Park 
On 3/6/12, Kukjin Kim  wrote:
> On 03/06/12 02:13, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> On 3/6/12, Kukjin Kim  wrote:
>>> On 03/01/12 00:40, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
 Patch 189eb7407 "ARM: EXYNOS: use 'exynos4-sdhci' as device name for
 sdhci
 controllers" changed the names of the SDHCI devices, but the author
 forgot
 to update the definitions for the regulator subsystem. This patch fixes
 this issue.

 Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski
 Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park
 ---
arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c   |4 ++--
arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c |2 +-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

 diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
 b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
 index 8c0479f..dd26581 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
 +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
 @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata nuri_hsmmc0_data
 __initdata = {
};

static struct regulator_consumer_supply emmc_supplies[] = {
 -  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
 +  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "dw_mmc"),
};

 @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata
 max8997_ldo12_[] = {
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vddio", "6-003c"), /* HDC802 */
};
static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo13_[] =
 {
 -  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
 +  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
};
static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo14_[] =
 {
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("inmotor", "max8997-haptic"),
 diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
 b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
 index 908624c..7cd738c 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
 +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
 @@ -750,7 +750,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata
 universal_hsmmc0_data
 __initdata = {
};

static struct regulator_consumer_supply mmc0_supplies[] = {
 -  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
 +  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
};

static struct regulator_init_data mmc0_fixed_voltage_init_data = {
>>>
>>> (Cc'ed Jaehoon Chung)
>>>
>>> Oops, I looked at same patch from Jaehoon Chung just now and it could
>>> be. However, including same Signed-off-by from Kyungmin Park, it seems
>>> wrong. What's happened in your side?
>>
>> As your delayed work, we did the same thing from both side.
>>
> NO! As I remember, there was same case from your side before. My concern
> is still how your sign can be added in duplication same patches but
> other author?
>
>> Most of all, exynos4-sdhci patchset should contains these change also.
>> as wrong merge, it breaks all sdhci support at least exynos4 series.
>
> Wrong merge? what's that?
That's problem. you don't know what you did. Did you test the
exynos4-sdhci patchset from Thomas?

and think why this patch is required.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Kgene.
> --
> Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer,
> SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc"
> in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: Exynos: fix SDHCI device names in regulator definitions

2012-03-06 Thread Kukjin Kim 

On 03/06/12 02:13, Kyungmin Park wrote:

On 3/6/12, Kukjin Kim  wrote:

On 03/01/12 00:40, Marek Szyprowski wrote:

Patch 189eb7407 "ARM: EXYNOS: use 'exynos4-sdhci' as device name for sdhci
controllers" changed the names of the SDHCI devices, but the author forgot
to update the definitions for the regulator subsystem. This patch fixes
this issue.

Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park
---
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c   |4 ++--
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c |2 +-
   2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
index 8c0479f..dd26581 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata nuri_hsmmc0_data
__initdata = {
   };

   static struct regulator_consumer_supply emmc_supplies[] = {
-   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
+   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "dw_mmc"),
   };

@@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata
max8997_ldo12_[] = {
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vddio", "6-003c"), /* HDC802 */
   };
   static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo13_[] = {
-   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
+   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
   };
   static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo14_[] = {
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("inmotor", "max8997-haptic"),
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
index 908624c..7cd738c 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
@@ -750,7 +750,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata universal_hsmmc0_data
__initdata = {
   };

   static struct regulator_consumer_supply mmc0_supplies[] = {
-   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
+   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
   };

   static struct regulator_init_data mmc0_fixed_voltage_init_data = {


(Cc'ed Jaehoon Chung)

Oops, I looked at same patch from Jaehoon Chung just now and it could
be. However, including same Signed-off-by from Kyungmin Park, it seems
wrong. What's happened in your side?


As your delayed work, we did the same thing from both side.

NO! As I remember, there was same case from your side before. My concern 
is still how your sign can be added in duplication same patches but 
other author?



Most of all, exynos4-sdhci patchset should contains these change also.
as wrong merge, it breaks all sdhci support at least exynos4 series.


Wrong merge? what's that?

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: Exynos: fix SDHCI device names in regulator definitions

2012-03-06 Thread Kyungmin Park 
On 3/6/12, Kukjin Kim  wrote:
> On 03/01/12 00:40, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> Patch 189eb7407 "ARM: EXYNOS: use 'exynos4-sdhci' as device name for sdhci
>> controllers" changed the names of the SDHCI devices, but the author forgot
>> to update the definitions for the regulator subsystem. This patch fixes
>> this issue.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski
>> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c   |4 ++--
>>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c |2 +-
>>   2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
>> b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
>> index 8c0479f..dd26581 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
>> @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata nuri_hsmmc0_data
>> __initdata = {
>>   };
>>
>>   static struct regulator_consumer_supply emmc_supplies[] = {
>> -REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
>> +REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
>>  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "dw_mmc"),
>>   };
>>
>> @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata
>> max8997_ldo12_[] = {
>>  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vddio", "6-003c"), /* HDC802 */
>>   };
>>   static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo13_[] = {
>> -REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
>> +REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
>>   };
>>   static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo14_[] = {
>>  REGULATOR_SUPPLY("inmotor", "max8997-haptic"),
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
>> b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
>> index 908624c..7cd738c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
>> @@ -750,7 +750,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata universal_hsmmc0_data
>> __initdata = {
>>   };
>>
>>   static struct regulator_consumer_supply mmc0_supplies[] = {
>> -REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
>> +REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
>>   };
>>
>>   static struct regulator_init_data mmc0_fixed_voltage_init_data = {
>
> (Cc'ed Jaehoon Chung)
>
> Oops, I looked at same patch from Jaehoon Chung just now and it could
> be. However, including same Signed-off-by from Kyungmin Park, it seems
> wrong. What's happened in your side?

As your delayed work, we did the same thing from both side.

Most of all, exynos4-sdhci patchset should contains these change also.
as wrong merge, it breaks all sdhci support at least exynos4 series.

Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: Exynos: fix SDHCI device names in regulator definitions

2012-03-06 Thread Kukjin Kim 

On 03/01/12 00:40, Marek Szyprowski wrote:

Patch 189eb7407 "ARM: EXYNOS: use 'exynos4-sdhci' as device name for sdhci
controllers" changed the names of the SDHCI devices, but the author forgot
to update the definitions for the regulator subsystem. This patch fixes
this issue.

Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park
---
  arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c   |4 ++--
  arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c |2 +-
  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
index 8c0479f..dd26581 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-nuri.c
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata nuri_hsmmc0_data 
__initdata = {
  };

  static struct regulator_consumer_supply emmc_supplies[] = {
-   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
+   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "dw_mmc"),
  };

@@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata 
max8997_ldo12_[] = {
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vddio", "6-003c"), /* HDC802 */
  };
  static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo13_[] = {
-   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
+   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.2"), /* TFLASH */
  };
  static struct regulator_consumer_supply __initdata max8997_ldo14_[] = {
REGULATOR_SUPPLY("inmotor", "max8997-haptic"),
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c 
b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
index 908624c..7cd738c 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-universal_c210.c
@@ -750,7 +750,7 @@ static struct s3c_sdhci_platdata universal_hsmmc0_data 
__initdata = {
  };

  static struct regulator_consumer_supply mmc0_supplies[] = {
-   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "s3c-sdhci.0"),
+   REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "exynos4-sdhci.0"),
  };

  static struct regulator_init_data mmc0_fixed_voltage_init_data = {


(Cc'ed Jaehoon Chung)

Oops, I looked at same patch from Jaehoon Chung just now and it could 
be. However, including same Signed-off-by from Kyungmin Park, it seems 
wrong. What's happened in your side?


Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html