Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] [PATCH 3/6] gxfb: move MSR bit fields into gxfb.h

[Andres S. <dil...@qu...>]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:14:32 -0700
Andrew Morton <ak...@li...> wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 20:48:40 -0500
> Andres Salomon <dil...@qu...> wrote:
> 
> > >From bee7242cf04c4a060b311b11985efb495f308355 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Andres Salomon <dil...@de...>
> > Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:29:36 -0500
> > Subject: [PATCH] gxfb: move MSR bit fields into gxfb.h
> > 
> > This continues the gxfb header cleanups.  MSRs are defined in geode.h;
> > the specific bits we care about are defined in gxfb.h.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andres Salomon <dil...@de...>
> > ---
> >  drivers/video/geode/display_gx.h |    3 ---
> >  drivers/video/geode/gxfb.h       |   16 ++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/video/geode/gxfb_core.c  |    2 +-
> >  drivers/video/geode/video_gx.c   |    4 ++--
> >  drivers/video/geode/video_gx.h   |   14 --------------
> >  5 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/video/geode/display_gx.h b/drivers/video/geode/display_gx.h
> > index 56e9d2e..ad556d3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/video/geode/display_gx.h
> > +++ b/drivers/video/geode/display_gx.h
> > @@ -16,7 +16,4 @@ int gx_line_delta(int xres, int bpp);
> >  
> >  extern struct geode_dc_ops gx_dc_ops;
> >  
> > -/* MSR that tells us if a TFT or CRT is attached */
> > -#define GLD_MSR_CONFIG_DM_FP 0x40
> > -
> >  #endif /* !__DISPLAY_GX1_H__ */
> 
> Something has gone wrong here.  The code in current mainline is
> 
> 
> 
> extern struct geode_dc_ops gx_dc_ops;
> 
> /* MSR that tells us if a TFT or CRT is attached */
> #define GLD_MSR_CONFIG   0xC0002001
> #define GLD_MSR_CONFIG_DM_FP 0x40
> 
> /* Display controller registers */
> 
> 
> whereas you're patching something else.
> 
> 
> In [1/6] you refer to "the MSR cleanup patch".  I don't know what that is.
> 

That would be this:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/645387/focus=645636


> 
> Please clean up the changelogs - remove those email headers from the
> email-forwarding operation and remove the additional little commentary on
> top: if there's actually anything in there which is needed then it should
> be integrated into the changelog proper, thanks.
> 

For future requests, or should I resend these to you?