From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the watchdog tree Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 12:12:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20170502191217.GA11901@roeck-us.net> References: <20170502140403.24e315cf@canb.auug.org.au> <20170502180940.GB26866@fury> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:39717 "EHLO bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751150AbdEBTMV (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 May 2017 15:12:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170502180940.GB26866@fury> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Darren Hart Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Andy Shevchenko , Wim Van Sebroeck , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 11:09:40AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 02:04:03PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the drivers-x86 tree got a conflict in: > > > > drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 38a700fa1df9 ("watchdog: iTCO_wdt: cleanup set/unset no_reboot_bit functions") > > (which also appears in the drivers-x86 tree as commit f583a884afec) > > > > Andy and Guenter, I presume the two of you discussed how this patch would get > submitted as I see the following in the platform driver x86 for-next branch: > > Acked-by: Guenter Roeck > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko > > for both: > > 140c91b2 watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Add PMC specific noreboot update api > f583a88 watchdog: iTCO_wdt: cleanup set/unset no_reboot_bit functions > I did not expect f583a88/38a700fa1df9 to show up in some other tree, sorry. I don't recall discussing how to handle it either, though my memory may defeat me. If so, my apologies. > This suggests these were deliberately added to our tree and not accidentally > included through a rebase without --preserve-merges or something like that. > > Guenter, if you prefer/need to submit this through your tree, can you provide > us with an immutable branch to merge for the dependencies of our later patches? > If you can drop these two patches without a dependency problem in your tree, > that would be the cleanest solution as we could avoid an additional merge. > Please check with Wim. Thanks, Guenter > Thanks, > > Darren > > > > > from the watchdog tree and commit: > > > > 140c91b26ebc ("watchdog: iTCO_wdt: Add PMC specific noreboot update api") > > > > from the drivers-x86 tree. > > > > I fixed it up 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. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Stephen Rothwell > > > > -- > Darren Hart > VMware Open Source Technology Center