From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kukjin Kim Subject: RE: linux-next: build failure after merge of the s5p tree Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:42:04 +0900 Message-ID: <01bb01ccca79$ae1ad770$0a508650$%kim@samsung.com> References: <20120103180854.e9bff732db50c0fa9afd2967@canb.auug.org.au> <010601ccc9ef$7e784640$7b68d2c0$%kim@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout1.samsung.com ([203.254.224.24]:37988 "EHLO mailout1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754643Ab2ADAmJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:42:09 -0500 In-reply-to: Content-language: ko Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: 'Linus Torvalds' Cc: 'Stephen Rothwell' , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 'Greg KH' Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > OK, I see. Firstly, I will rebase my for-next as per your suggestion. As > you > > know, I just wanted to avoid known conflicts with driver-core tree. > > Please, in general you should *not* rebase on top of other peoples OK, I will remember. And as a note, I didn't 'rebase' on top of other tree just 'merge' in the case of having dependency with others and of course if that is _really_ required. But we know, if the merged tree is rebased, something wrong will happen :( > trees either. What's the conflict and why do you need that other tree > in the first place? > The driver-core tree changed usage(?) of sysdev_class and touched some files and the changed files have been merged into one file for some reason without driver-core's changes in samsung tree. So I just wanted to avoid the conflicts. Linus, how should/can I do in this case? Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.