From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bjdooks-i2c tree with Linus' tree Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 17:46:25 +0000 Message-ID: <20111102174625.GI18361@trinity.fluff.org> References: <20111102122221.9040e7a07bb0e3e2c46a5188@canb.auug.org.au> <20111102022850.GA5875@zhy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from trinity.fluff.org ([89.16.178.74]:42167 "EHLO trinity.fluff.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755795Ab1KBRq2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:46:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111102022850.GA5875@zhy> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Yong Zhang Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Ben Dooks , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:28:50AM +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: > 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. Unfortunately there was a merge conflict. I thought it got fixed, but seems not. I will sort out fixing it later. -- Large Hadron Colada: A large Pina Colada that makes the universe disappear.