Re: [GIT PULL] Rockchip dts64 changes for 6.15 #3

["Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>]

Am Montag, 7. April 2025, 18:43:54 Mitteleuropäische Sommerzeit schrieb Rob Herring:
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at 11:40 AM Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > Am Montag, 7. April 2025, 17:56:37 Mitteleuropäische Sommerzeit schrieb Rob Herring:
> > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 6:56 PM Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi soc maintainers,
> > > >
> > > > I made an error and accidentially applied a patch that was meant for
> > > > the mfd tree. Thankfully Stephen noticed that when the duplicate
> > > > commit appeared in linux-next.
> > >
> > > Both commits are in v6.15-rc1 now and the revert is not, so this
> > > should not get applied/pulled. Or you will need to revert the revert.
> >
> > yes, that was the intention.
> >
> > Back when I submitted this PR, I talked with Arnd on IRC the next day.
> >
> > As both commits are identical sans some Signed-off-by lines, he suggested
> > not trying to put a revert in, but instead let git solve it itself, because
> >
> > arnd on IRC:
> > > [...], but I worry that this would make things worse if 'git merge'
> > > ends up doing the revert on top of the original commit once it gets to
> > > torvalds. Not sure if that's still a problem in git these days, but
> > > I've seen it happen in the past.
> > > if two identical patches are in different branches, just leaving them
> > > there is usually easier
> >
> > So this PR was already marked as "superseeded" in patchwork back
> > on march 20th.
> >
> >
> > Nevertheless, thanks for making sure no funky revert happens now.
> 
> The commit is still in linux-next though. That's how I happened upon this.

Ah right. I've recreated my next branch earlier today, after the -rc1
release, so this should be gone with the next linux-next.

Heiko