All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 11:40:29 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181217194029.GZ6707@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181217191753.172ca200@canb.auug.org.au>

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> [181217 00:18]:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the gpio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   19a2668a8ae3 ("ARM: OMAP1: ams-delta: Provide GPIO lookup table for LED device")
> 
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> 
>   21abf103818a ("gpio: Pass a flag to gpiochip_request_own_desc()")
> 
> from the gpio tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the former removed the code updated by the latter, so
> I used that) 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.

OK thank you.

Regards,

Tony

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@gmail.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
	ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 11:40:29 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181217194029.GZ6707@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181217191753.172ca200@canb.auug.org.au>

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> [181217 00:18]:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the gpio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   19a2668a8ae3 ("ARM: OMAP1: ams-delta: Provide GPIO lookup table for LED device")
> 
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> 
>   21abf103818a ("gpio: Pass a flag to gpiochip_request_own_desc()")
> 
> from the gpio tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the former removed the code updated by the latter, so
> I used that) 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.

OK thank you.

Regards,

Tony



_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-17 19:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-17  8:17 linux-next: manual merge of the gpio tree with the arm-soc tree Stephen Rothwell
2018-12-17  8:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-12-17 19:40 ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2018-12-17 19:40   ` Tony Lindgren
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-09-27  5:05 Stephen Rothwell
2016-09-27  5:05 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-09-27 19:16 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-09-27 19:16   ` Tony Lindgren
2016-10-05 22:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-10-05 22:41   ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-10-06  6:52   ` Linus Walleij
2016-10-06  6:52     ` Linus Walleij
2014-07-29  8:19 Stephen Rothwell
2014-07-29  8:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-07-29  8:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-07-29  8:26 ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-29  8:26   ` Thierry Reding

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=20181217194029.GZ6707@atomide.com \
    --to=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=jmkrzyszt@gmail.com \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --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.