From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Walker Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the msm tree with the arm tree Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:46:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1287427572.4105.22.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> References: <20101018103540.7bd9c535.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20101018110207.131b56ee.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20101018081520.GA10551@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <1287422792.4105.14.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> <20101018182044.GA558@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fifo99.com ([67.223.236.141]:48344 "EHLO fifo99.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754205Ab0JRSqn (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:46:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20101018182044.GA558@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Russell King Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeremy Kerr , Jeff Ohlstein On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 19:20 +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 10:26:32AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 09:15 +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 11:02:07AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > [ Just cc'ing Russell, sorry about that] > > > > > > > > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:35:40 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the msm tree got a conflict in > > > > > arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/debug-macro.S between commit > > > > > 08a610d9ef5394525b0328da0162d7b58c982cc4 ("arm: return both physical and > > > > > virtual addresses from addruart") from the arm tree and commit > > > > > 46fe5f29e3062f681cc3cf07a604d82396faea89 ("msm: allow uart to be > > > > > conditionally disabled") from the msm tree. > > > > > > > > > > Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as > > > > > necessary. > > > > > > Thanks, but I don't think there's much which can be done about these. > > > Changes such as 08a610d affect all ARM sub-architectures, and as they're > > > spread across multiple git trees... > > > > > > I think there's going to be some problems during this forthcoming merge > > > window. > > > > Would be nice to get CC'd ... > > > > Ideally this patch should have been broken up and sent individually to > > each maintainer .. Then I could manage this within my own tree.. > > Err no. It is one complete change which can't be broken up sensibly. > Breaking it up will mean either you lose functionality or you break > your build. Ok, well in that case why not accept this immediately after the merge window? A point when everything is quiet, and most of the tree's are empty? Well how about I merge this change into my tree ? Daniel