Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] pinctrl: sunxi: Allwinner A733 support

Hi Andre,

This series no longer applies to mainline. Patch 1/9 fails on current
master (45c13f3f9e3b), for two separate reasons - one of them from
outside the series, which is why I am reporting it rather than just
fixing it locally.

Applying the series in order:

  [RFC PATCH 1/9] pinctrl: sunxi: rename SUNXI_PINCTRL_NEW_REG_LAYOUT
    error: patch failed: drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c:1521
    error: patch failed: drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.h:88

The blocking one is your own patch 2/9. It merged as 42e06688c6cb
("pinctrl: sunxi: pass down flags to pinctrl routines") without 1/9, so
sunxi_pinctrl_init_with_flags() now reads

	pctl->flags = flags;

where 1/9 still expects

	pctl->variant = flags & SUNXI_PINCTRL_VARIANT_MASK;

as context. A 3-way merge does not resolve it - both sides touch
adjacent lines, so it conflicts.

The second is unrelated to your work. 70f8915ea4e9 ("pinctrl: sunxi: fix
gpiochip_lock_as_irq() failure when pinmux is unknown") inserted
SUN4I_FUNC_DISABLED_OLD/NEW into 1/9's header hunk context, and added a
fifth use of SUNXI_PINCTRL_NEW_REG_LAYOUT, in
sunxi_pinctrl_irq_request_resources(). The header hunk merges cleanly
with -3, but that new use is not covered by the rename, so the tree then
fails to build with an undeclared identifier.

Patches 3/9 through 9/9 apply cleanly once 1/9 is resolved.

Static reproduction only - no A733 hardware here, so nothing in this
message says anything about whether the series works. I am not sending a
rebase: which shape 1/9 should take now that 2/9 is in is your call.

Vinicius