From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Balbi Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with Linus' tree Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:55:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20101216155554.GA9552@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> References: <20101216140122.ca745f1f.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20101216030857.GA12785@kroah.com> <20101216080527.GA2601@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20101216084552.GD2601@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20101216155225.GA31363@kroah.com> Reply-To: balbi@ti.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Received: from na3sys009aog111.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.205]:54295 "EHLO na3sys009aog111.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753180Ab0LPP4F (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:56:05 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101216155225.GA31363@kroah.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Greg KH Cc: Felipe Balbi , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bob Liu , Mike Frysinger Hi, On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 07:52:25AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: >On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:45:52AM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:05:27AM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> >On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:08:57PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: >> >>On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 02:01:22PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >>>Hi Greg, >> >>> >> >>>Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got a conflict in >> >>>drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c >> >>>drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h between commit >> >>>1e393c6eece048052d4131ec4dad3b98e35a98e2 ("USB: musb: blackfin: pm: make >> >>>it work") from Linus' tree (v2.6.37-rc2) and various commits from the usb >> >>>tree. >> >>> >> >>>It was not immediately obvious how to fix these up, so I just used the >> >>>versions from the usb tree. This may not be correct and it would be good >> >>>if this was fixed properly in the usb tree. >> >> >> >>Hm. Felipe, I'll merge in the -rc4 tree into usb-next if it makes sense >> >>to do so now, can you send me the patch that ends up being the correct >> >>merge? >> > >> >Sure, I'll check it now and send in a patch in a few minutes. >> >> There are two commits you didn't have in your usb-next branch which are >> in mainline. Reverting them will make greg/usb-next apply cleanly on top >> of v2.6.47-rc4. The commits are: >> >> 32d5dc9520f0c6f60f691dd478741c774e292406 : USB: musb: pm: don't rely fully on clock support >> 1e393c6eece048052d4131ec4dad3b98e35a98e2 : USB: musb: blackfin: pm: make it work >> >> Do you want me to rebase on top of -rc4 or is reverting those two enough >> for you ? As a sidenote, the series I sent you already fixes those two >> cases as we moved PM and clock handling entirely to glue layer, so those >> two cases are taken care of on the series, reverting those patches won't >> pose any regressions. > >So, I should do the following things: > take -rc6 > revert the above commits > merge with usb-next > push out > >and all should be good, right? If so, that's fine with me, I'll do it Perfect, I just tried again just to be sure Merges cleanly: commit 6033eb6e16e602f97ac5b6424ef71c8e464ececc Merge: fa05820 0b83ae9 Author: Felipe Balbi Date: Thu Dec 16 17:55:14 2010 +0200 Merge remote-tracking branch 'greg/usb-next' into linus -- balbi