From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shawn Guo Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the imx-mxs tree with the arm-soc tree Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:55:22 +0800 Message-ID: <20180327075520.GA3245@dragon> References: <20180327091026.3facbb9d@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180327091026.3facbb9d@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell , Arnd Bergmann Cc: Olof Johansson , ARM , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Fabio Estevam List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 09:10:26AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Shawn, > > Today's linux-next merge of the imx-mxs tree got a conflict in: > > arch/arm/configs/mxs_defconfig > > between commit: > > e3e583e7a293 ("ARM: mxs_defconfig: Re-sync defconfig") > > from the arm-soc tree and commit: > > 8bc2c29b550c ("ARM: mxs_defconfig: Re-sync defconfig") > > from the imx-mxs tree. > > I fixed it up (I just used the latter version) 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. Thanks, Stephen. We will sort this out on arm-soc tree. Arnd, You pulled "[GIT PULL 6/6] i.MX defconfig updates for 4.17" [1]? I thought you did not pull it, and updated it with v2 to address your comment. Let me know which one you want to send upstream. Thanks. Shawn [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/886191/