From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommu tree with the arm tree Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:02:59 +0100 Message-ID: <20160620080259.GJ22276@flint.armlinux.org.uk> References: <20160620132009.4e2c0e32@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:33378 "EHLO pandora.armlinux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751979AbcFTIDR (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 04:03:17 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160620132009.4e2c0e32@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Joerg Roedel , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 01:20:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > Today's linux-next merge of the iommu tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c > > between commit: > > d267804c8457 ("iommu: convert DT component matching to component_match_add_release()") > > from the arm tree and commit: > > da4d6e6d3b3e ("iommu/mediatek: Convert DT component matching to component_match_add_release()") > > from the iommu tree. This looks like it's going to end up being broken. I self-NACK'd my v2 patch series was, and it looks like the v2 patch was picked up instead of v1. It's also part of a _three_ patch series, where the _second two_ patches depend on the _first_ patch. Such series can't be split up. -- Russell King ARM architecture Linux Kernel maintainer