From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tj@kernel.org (Tejun Heo)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:50:32 -0400
Subject: [PATCH v11 3/8] ata: libahci_platform: move port_map parameters
 into the AHCI structure
In-Reply-To: <20140730164721.GA15772@kwain>
References: <1406193450-17283-1-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com>
 <1406193450-17283-4-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com>
 <20140729144042.GD4791@htj.dyndns.org>
 <20140730082038.GB29900@kwain>
 <20140730153526.GB23734@htj.dyndns.org>
 <20140730164721.GA15772@kwain>
Message-ID: <20140730165032.GD23734@htj.dyndns.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 06:47:21PM +0200, Antoine T?nart wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:35:26AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:20:38AM +0200, Antoine T?nart wrote:
> > > How do you want me to send the series? There is two conflicts when
> > > applying to libata/for-3.17:
> > > - patch 4/8: it takes into account a patch not in libata/for-3.17 but
> > >   added before rc7. It should be better to first merge rc7, otherwise
> > >   some modifications won't make sense.
> > > - patch 6/8: "fsl,imx53-ahci" was removed from the documentation in
> > >   libata/for-3.17 but not in rc7. Resolving the conflict is really
> > >   simple.
> > > 
> > > I think it's better to apply the whole thing after merging rc7 into
> > > libata/for-3.17, because it will only have a really simple conflict to
> > > resolve.
> > > 
> > > Please tell me what do you prefer before I send the updated version.
> > 
> > Hmmm... does pulling in libata/for-3.16-fixes into libata/for-3.17
> > resolves the conflict?  If so, please send the patch on top of the
> > merged branch.  I wanna avoid pulling in -rc7 wholesale at this point.
> 
> Works for me. I'll cook and send a series based on top of
> libata/for-3.16-fixes merged into libata/for-3.17.

I pulled libata/for-3.16-fixes into for-3.17, so you can just base on
that one.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun