From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Gortmaker Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the char-misc tree with the lightnvm tree Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 10:45:38 -0500 Message-ID: <20161122154538.GO2165@windriver.com> References: <20161122182908.4c961d64@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161122182908.4c961d64@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Greg KH , Arnd Bergmann , Matias =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rling?= , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Javier =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gonz=E1lez?= List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org [linux-next: manual merge of the char-misc tree with the lightnvm tree] On 22/11/2016 (Tue 18:29) Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the char-misc tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/lightnvm/core.c > > between commit: > > 7b0d392f6957 ("lightnvm: remove sysfs configuration interface") > > from the lightnvm tree and commit: > > 389b2a1c0e90 ("lightnvm: make core.c explicitly non-modular") > > from the char-misc tree. > > I fixed it up (the former removed the code that was commented by the > latter, so I just removed it) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your > tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider > cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any > particularly complex conflicts. > > I do wonder why commit 389b2a1c0e90 is in the char-misc tree and not > the lightnvm or block trees? It relied on the new macro builtin_misc_device which came in via char-misc. I was going to wait a release but Greg said he'd be willing to take the patch in his tree concurrently. P. -- > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell