From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with Linus' tree
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 17:31:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120324173152.494DA3E0A26@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120323094139.GA7231@sortiz-mobl>
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:41:39 +0100, Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 02:32:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Samuel,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mfd tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/mfd/twl-core.c between commits 5769089ac725 ("mfd: twl-core.c:
> > Fix the number of interrupts managed by twl4030"), 75294957be1d
> > ("irq_domain: Remove 'new' irq_domain in favour of the ppc one") and
> > 964dba283439 ("devicetree: Add empty of_platform_populate() for !
> > CONFIG_OF_ADDRESS (sparc)") from Linus' tree and commits 9e1786202704
> > ("mfd: Make twl-core not depend on pdata->irq_base/end") and 78518ffa08fc
> > ("mfd: Move twl-core IRQ allocation into twl[4030|6030]-irq files") from
> > the mfd tree.
> >
> > I *think* that the right thing to do is to use the version from the mfd
> > tree ...
> That's correct.
> I have a for-next-merge branch where I usually have the merge conflicts with
> Linus tree fixed, in case you're interested.
>
>
> > I do wonder why I only got this now (in the merge window) ...
> I got a pull request from Benoit a couple days before the merge window opened.
> Then I realized part of the pull request contained a merge of one of Grant's
> branch. So I wanted to wait for Grant's code to get in before picking the mfd
> work on top of it. I didn't want to send a pull request to Linus with a merge
> point for something that would have been already merged. Maybe I was wrong,
> you tell me.
It should have gone into linux-next before then. Waiting for my tree
to hit linus' tree defeats the purpose of linux-next. Now you're
branch hasn't had any testing and therefore is a risky merge.
If you've got a branch you intend to send to Linus, then it really
needs to be in linux-next. If that branch depends on another branch,
that's fine; you can still hold off actually sending the pull req to
Linus until the dependency makes it in. Better yet, *ask*.
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-25 0:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-23 3:32 linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-23 9:41 ` Samuel Ortiz
2012-03-24 17:31 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2012-03-26 8:25 ` Samuel Ortiz
2012-03-28 22:47 ` Grant Likely
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-12-16 2:15 Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-05 22:49 Stephen Rothwell
2019-06-11 4:31 Stephen Rothwell
2019-05-09 2:44 Stephen Rothwell
2019-02-08 2:37 Stephen Rothwell
2019-02-08 8:33 ` Jarkko Nikula
2018-08-17 0:39 Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-21 8:08 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-08-21 8:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-28 13:34 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-08-28 21:45 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-03-08 1:33 Stephen Rothwell
2018-03-08 8:12 ` Lee Jones
2014-11-13 1:47 Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-28 3:20 Stephen Rothwell
2012-10-03 4:12 Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-18 3:19 Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-18 7:31 ` Dong Aisheng
2012-09-12 2:49 Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-25 1:18 Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-25 6:40 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-23 3:01 Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-22 4:14 Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-22 4:10 Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-12 1:06 Stephen Rothwell
2011-09-09 4:22 Stephen Rothwell
2011-03-21 1:26 Stephen Rothwell
2011-03-21 8:21 ` Linus Walleij
2011-03-22 11:16 ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-03-23 17:57 ` Linus Walleij
2011-03-22 11:08 ` Samuel Ortiz
2010-09-13 1:54 Stephen Rothwell
2010-09-13 13:59 ` Samuel Ortiz
2010-08-12 4:41 Stephen Rothwell
2010-08-12 9:51 ` Samuel Ortiz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120324173152.494DA3E0A26@localhost \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=b-cousson@ti.com \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sameo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.