From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the mailbox tree Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:36:09 +0200 Message-ID: <201306210936.09593.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20130621162656.bb94e0fa8b6813781b804a73@canb.auug.org.au> <20130621071239.GM5523@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:65006 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161296Ab3FUHgm (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:36:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130621071239.GM5523@atomide.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Olof Johansson , Stephen Rothwell , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Suman Anna , Omar Ramirez Luna , Loic Pallardy On Friday 21 June 2013, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > I wonder if this mess is caused by the fact that I did the revert > > instead of rebuilding our for-next and dropping the merge in the first > > place. > > > > I'll rebuild our for-next (or maybe Arnd will beat me to it) before > > next linux-next build, i.e. Sunday night my time. > > Could be, especially if some of the commits are the same in the reverted > branch and newly merged branch as git might think that some merges have > been already resolved the right way earlier. I already rebuilt the arm-soc tree before Stephen started with today's linux-next, so I think the conflict is elsewhere. It's probably best if Suman Anna rebases the mailbox tree on top of the omap mailbox branch that I took. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:36:09 +0200 Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the mailbox tree In-Reply-To: <20130621071239.GM5523@atomide.com> References: <20130621162656.bb94e0fa8b6813781b804a73@canb.auug.org.au> <20130621071239.GM5523@atomide.com> Message-ID: <201306210936.09593.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday 21 June 2013, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > I wonder if this mess is caused by the fact that I did the revert > > instead of rebuilding our for-next and dropping the merge in the first > > place. > > > > I'll rebuild our for-next (or maybe Arnd will beat me to it) before > > next linux-next build, i.e. Sunday night my time. > > Could be, especially if some of the commits are the same in the reverted > branch and newly merged branch as git might think that some merges have > been already resolved the right way earlier. I already rebuilt the arm-soc tree before Stephen started with today's linux-next, so I think the conflict is elsewhere. It's probably best if Suman Anna rebases the mailbox tree on top of the omap mailbox branch that I took. Arnd