From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Ferre Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the l2-mtd tree with the at91 tree Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 11:53:35 +0200 Message-ID: <4E69E21F.5070701@atmel.com> References: <20110909132920.3696fbb6c1b90cded9727d30@canb.auug.org.au> <1315550734.7905.14.camel@sauron> <20110909164539.bae897109d3de0e67f0db69a@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from newsmtp5.atmel.com ([204.2.163.5]:12899 "EHLO sjogate2.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933080Ab1IIJyY (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Sep 2011 05:54:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110909164539.bae897109d3de0e67f0db69a@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: dedekind1@gmail.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , Nico Erfurth , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Russell King - ARM Linux Le 09/09/2011 08:45, Stephen Rothwell : > Hi Artem, > > On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:45:28 +0300 Artem Bityutskiy > wrote: >> >> OK, thanks, I guess you'll carry this modification so far, we'll >> need to take care of the conflict when merging. > > Yep, no worries. Stephen, I have seen the two manual merges that you made concerning our at91-next tree. This is when we realize how linux-next is a great tool ;-) So, as I am not so used to this kind of situation, I wonder if I need to included those two patches from Russell's and Artem's git trees in our at91-next one or if I only carry on with current patch series until Linus merges all this himself? Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre