From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the
 kspp-gustavo tree
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 10:31:33 +1000
Message-ID: <20190729103133.5a3deb85@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20190723110331.1967d000@canb.auug.org.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/DqgcD_x8eYr0_R2i9O0jMTP";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190723110331.1967d000@canb.auug.org.au>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>, Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>, DRI <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

--Sig_/DqgcD_x8eYr0_R2i9O0jMTP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:03:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> =
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in:
>=20
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>=20
> between commit:
>=20
>   b6ac32eac063 ("drm/i915: Mark expected switch fall-throughs")

This is now commit

  2defb94edb44 (""drm/i915: Mark expected switch fall-throughs")

from Linus' tree.

> from the kspp-gustavo tree and commit:
>=20
>   bc85328ff431 ("drm/i915: Move the TypeC port handling code to a separat=
e file")
>   4f36afb26cbe ("drm/i915: Sanitize the TypeC FIA lane configuration deco=
ding")
>=20
> from the drm-intel tree.
>=20
> I fixed it up (bc85328ff431 moved the function updated by b6ac32eac063
> and 4f36afb26cbe added an equivalent fixup) 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.

--=20
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

--Sig_/DqgcD_x8eYr0_R2i9O0jMTP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAl0+PmUACgkQAVBC80lX
0Gz6bQf+KJXRHgo9OonMtR1Pc5z36XAnT9kMF0gp1cqGpTIdX0avC7dzI/tkcpS1
hdUOEYF1oc0DHbeb1HHWyRjfoPUgL9EUJwxCATyOuFv7V3UKbTxOZ3N5wSC1z5Yb
lA8IiuOW9xkyf4Pbf6BOYCErtzyicskwARI3AzW7qCHgRe3+WpGaV6LayJzuOcX6
TRefqb/dFGeo2ly9mkvcPpY8CgT5rKCjWchgbGICNqyGH9LMMH2jIxIfyXjV09AX
q9sXlyVxeJTNP8Eqpb2C/TBbaceCvRNt3/iLpuL4ZYdFr4QaMVJvOj6accgzpvCV
p3EWr5ky/iGRDcekwNbkyVVmsMEz1A==
=TFsE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/DqgcD_x8eYr0_R2i9O0jMTP--