From: Ryan Mallon <ryan@bluewatersys.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Victor <linux@maxim.org.za>,
Marc Pignat <marc.pignat@hevs.ch>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree with the arm-current tree
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:18:52 +1300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4998B0EC.5020302@bluewatersys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090216103947.12d84612.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/mach-at91/gpio.c between commit
> 2b768b6cdbcf7fa0761e6c35c6ea288297582c43 ("[ARM] 5391/1: AT91: Enable
> GPIO clocks earlier") from the arm-current tree and commit
> f373e8c0639f1720d2d0fe414990f504e113c2ba ("[ARM] 5373/2: Add gpiolib
> support to AT91") from the arm tree.
>
> Overlapping changes. I fixed it up as below (which may not be correct,
> so needs checking) and can carry the fix for a while.
The fix looks okay. Stupid question: What is the easiest/best way for me
to apply the same fix into my tree to replicate the merge? My tree has
some additional stuff in it to support the custom AT91 board I am using.
I tried downloading the patch 5391/1 from the patch system and using
git-apply, but there doesn't seem to be a way to force it into a merge
like you can with git-am (and I can't find that patch on the mailing
list). If I can figure out how to do this, I'll test the code to make
sure it is still okay.
~Ryan
--
Bluewater Systems Ltd - ARM Technology Solution Centre
Ryan Mallon Unit 5, Amuri Park
Phone: +64 3 3779127 404 Barbadoes St
Fax: +64 3 3779135 PO Box 13 889
Email: ryan@bluewatersys.com Christchurch, 8013
Web: http://www.bluewatersys.com New Zealand
Freecall Australia 1800 148 751 USA 1800 261 2934
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-16 0:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-15 23:39 linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree with the arm-current tree Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-16 0:18 ` Ryan Mallon [this message]
2009-02-16 0:29 ` Russell King
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-03-23 0:06 Stephen Rothwell
2009-05-06 1:32 Stephen Rothwell
2010-01-17 23:35 Stephen Rothwell
2010-01-18 1:33 ` Ben Dooks
2010-01-18 3:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-02-02 0:07 Stephen Rothwell
2010-07-26 1:13 Stephen Rothwell
2010-09-27 4:21 Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-11 1:24 Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-11 7:48 ` Anders Larsen
2010-10-11 23:33 Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-12 8:03 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-10-12 8:28 ` Russell King
2010-10-12 9:23 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-10-12 9:42 ` Russell King
2010-10-12 10:02 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-10-12 10:35 ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-05 23:58 Stephen Rothwell
2010-12-14 23:54 Stephen Rothwell
2010-12-14 23:57 ` Russell King
2010-12-15 12:28 ` Dave Martin
2010-12-15 16:43 ` Russell King
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=4998B0EC.5020302@bluewatersys.com \
--to=ryan@bluewatersys.com \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@maxim.org.za \
--cc=marc.pignat@hevs.ch \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--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.