From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yong Zhang Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bjdooks-i2c tree with Linus' tree Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 10:28:50 +0800 Message-ID: <20111102022850.GA5875@zhy> References: <20111102122221.9040e7a07bb0e3e2c46a5188@canb.auug.org.au> Reply-To: Yong Zhang Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:58213 "EHLO mail-gy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754339Ab1KBC3E (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Nov 2011 22:29:04 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111102122221.9040e7a07bb0e3e2c46a5188@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Ben Dooks , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:22:21PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Ben, > > Today's linux-next merge of the bjdooks-i2c tree got a conflict in > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c between commit 4311051c358a > ("i2c: irq: Remove IRQF_DISABLED") from Linus' tree and commit > f8420b7bf6ce ("fixup merge") from the bjdooks-i2c tree. > > I fixed it up (by removing the IRQF_DISABLED flag) but this change should > probably be sent to Linus as it appears to have been fixed up incorrectly > there. Yeah, we should remove that flag. And that is what commit 4311051c358a want to achieve. Thanks, Yong