From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: shawn.guo@freescale.com (Shawn Guo) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:44:53 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v2] staging: imx-drm-core: skip components whose parent device is disabled In-Reply-To: <20140422215506.GC24070@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1397440946-2303-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@freescale.com> <20140421233148.GZ2523@dragon> <201404222249.07486.arnd@arndb.de> <20140422215506.GC24070@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20140423074451.GE2523@dragon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:55:06PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > So care to explain why there were _zero_ merge conflicts from -rc time > before the merge window up to about a week _into_ the merge window, and > then suddenly arm-soc starts conflicting not only locally here but _also_ > in linux-next. > > That stinks of arm-soc merging new stuff *during* the merge window. I'm not sure that's the case. It seems to me that the merge conflict was reported by Stephen Rothwell one month ahead of the merge window [1]. Shawn [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/25/21 > > And don't try to deny that - remember, I run a build system here locally, > and I _manually_ merge Linus' tip into my tip (which contains *everything* > including the staged changes for imx-drm and those binding changes) _and_ > finally arm-soc's for-next branch, and there were _zero_ conflicts at the > start of the merge window.