Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-msm tree with the drm tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 13:07:10 +1000

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-msm tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem.c

between commit:

  7690a33f22ab ("drm: msm: fix common struct sg_table related issues")

from the drm tree and commit:

  e1bf29e022fb ("drm/msm: drop cache sync hack")

from the drm-msm tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem.c
index e47958c3704a,3cb7aeb93fd3..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem.c
@@@ -52,23 -52,16 +52,14 @@@ static void sync_for_device(struct msm_
  {
  	struct device *dev = msm_obj->base.dev->dev;
  
- 	if (get_dma_ops(dev) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64)) {
- 		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(dev, msm_obj->sgt,
- 					    DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
- 	} else {
- 		dma_map_sgtable(dev, msm_obj->sgt, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL, 0);
- 	}
 -	dma_map_sg(dev, msm_obj->sgt->sgl,
 -		msm_obj->sgt->nents, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
++	dma_map_sgtable(dev, msm_obj->sgt, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL, 0);
  }
  
  static void sync_for_cpu(struct msm_gem_object *msm_obj)
  {
  	struct device *dev = msm_obj->base.dev->dev;
  
- 	if (get_dma_ops(dev) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64)) {
- 		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(dev, msm_obj->sgt, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
- 	} else {
- 		dma_unmap_sgtable(dev, msm_obj->sgt, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL, 0);
- 	}
 -	dma_unmap_sg(dev, msm_obj->sgt->sgl,
 -		msm_obj->sgt->nents, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
++	dma_unmap_sgtable(dev, msm_obj->sgt, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL, 0);
  }
  
  /* allocate pages from VRAM carveout, used when no IOMMU: */