[PATCH] Re: Linkstation Mini and __machine_arch_type problem, not booting since 3.8

[Benjamin Cama]

Le lundi 22 juin 2015 à 12:08 +0000, Jason Cooper a écrit :
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 07:37:55PM +0200, Benjamin Cama wrote:
> > Le vendredi 19 juin 2015 ?? 17:13 +0000, Jason Cooper a ??crit :
> > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:48:50PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 03:25:52PM +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > > > Let's just get the dts patch reviewed and merged first.  Russell
> > > > > actually wrote the patch to do what he's describing for mach-dove.
> > > > > 
> > > > >   http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-December/309684.html
> > > > > 
> > > > > Although, it looks like it never got updated for submission...
> > > > > 
> > > > >   http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-December/311800.html
> > > > 
> > > > I do still have that patch, it's based on v4.0 though - like all my
> > > > Dove work, it only builds on the previous -final kernel release.
> > > 
> > > Benjamin, after the dts, would you mind picking up Russell's dove patch and
> > > making a cooresponding orion5x patch?
> > 
> > If the plan is to move to DT, is it still needed?
> 
> Sure, because orion5x is slow-going.  There aren't that many users.
> Since we prefer tested patches, we need to grab the opportunity when it
> comes a long.  It could be another year or more before we see more
> patches for orion5x.  Fully converting orion5x to DT doesn't have a
> schedule, it's as we encounter devs willing to post patches for their
> boards.

According to rmk, letting their board break may be a quicker way to get
the patches ;-) (and I agree with that: I wouldn't have moved to DT so
fast if the build didn't break, it is a good incentive).

> The opportunity here is that you were just booting a legacy board file
> on an orion5x SoC.  Therefore, you're in the best position to write/test
> the irq change.

OK, I understand. I'll try to find the time to test the non-DT case and
offer a patch. About Russell's one: how is the Signed-off-by going in
this case? I put his and then mine?

Regards,
--
benjamin