From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alexandre.torgue@st.com (Alexandre Torgue) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 12:06:13 +0100 Subject: [GIT PULL] STM32 DT changes for v4.11 #1 In-Reply-To: References: <20170117065309.GS16607@localhost> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 01/20/2017 11:30 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:49:29PM +0100, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >>> ----- >>> First patch "clk: stm32f4: Update DT bindings documentation") >>> has already been merged in clock tree. >> >> Ugh. That patch doesn't just update documentation. It also updates the >> dt-include file. >> >> So, if it's already been merged into the clock tree, then we can't merge >> a separate copy here. >> >> By now, easiest is to hold off making use of it until it's on a shared >> branch, i.e. next release. Use the numerical values until then. > > I suggested doing it this way if the same commit ID could be used rather > than having two identical commits with different IDs in the two branches, > which would be bad practice. > > Alexandre, can you clarify whether this is the same commit ID on both > branches, and whether the tree it was merged into is one that does > not get rebased? Actually, commit SHA1 are different in clk tree and stm32-dt tree. Do I need to "re-build" my branch based on 4.10-rc1 + "dt bindings patch with clk (with the same sha1 than in clock tree) " ? Alex > > Arnd >