OMAP build now completely broken in latest arm-soc

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 05:56:58AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Not much more to say...

arch/arm/plat-omap/i2c.c:35:1: error: expected identifier or '(' before '<<' token

Hmm. In for-next, line 35 is a blank line.

Could this be because of a merge conflict in your local version? This
is one of the files that has conflicts with mainline right now; I'll
look to see if we can resolve those in our tree later today.

Hmm, it looks like a merge conflict which didn't get fixed up... and
looking at it, it's beyond what I'd call trivial to fix.

So I'll shut down the build system until that can be resolved properly;
as OMAP is effectively unbuildable there's not much point it running the
builds.

Tony, Tomi,

I've taken a stab at resolving these conflicts. They seem to come from
the cleanups combined with fixes that went upstream, and it seems like
we want to stick to the arm-soc versions for most of the conflicts.

I've pushed a merge of 3.7-rc7 into next/cleanup (and for-next) of
arm-soc, can you please check and see if this is the correct
resolution? As far as I can tell it is, but a double-check would be
appreciated.

Conflicts were in:

        arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
        arch/arm/plat-omap/i2c.c
        drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss.c

The hwmod data was trivial (include files). i2c was a little hairier,
a revert in mainline -- I presumed we're still good with our arm-soc
contents so I stuck close to what we had there. The DSS change seems
to be done completely differently in mainline, i.e. the surrounding
code is different to what we have in arm-soc today, and it looks like
the bugfix (3630-specific stuff) is taken care of in the version we
had. So I stuck to that.

But, please speak up ASAP if the above doesn't look correct, since we
want to fix it up before we merge much on top.


Thanks!


-Olof