From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FCF445026; Thu, 31 Oct 2024 02:20:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730341230; cv=none; b=f9yTm6n+U003NOJkMFlYpFITvGwkclODKQuyU//yodKmoIlR9P3v3wB38ULvfPX8eMaTwgfUhVPhU+yNvGS1Hb2bHMeggnOpQaYGu76Ap4bmw060TIc4AHZK7b1fR/OLkQ74/IqVargl6bRvwsapiYt+/fsJhgvOvVdtxkfwBu4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730341230; c=relaxed/simple; bh=drU3KW7IEWpok2cJ6SbKWoKUJDEAts5QmVDexHgPN7k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ZkP5WxYzszpwoO8TOcP4k8BdynRG31BJSMCtn0CtgIUQ4MxiesuygrLoRkmSPNLtIbPoqjxEhnzUoF9D0fstKBvIDZLA7oSMBKE/OeZ5ZkW21kqgqIfl6q7upHF2xh5sIdSyu5d+51ijfP5EaYbFN3FVTsl0nm1uzoomCclIKgg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b=nfc2Q/E0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="nfc2Q/E0" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1730341222; bh=xqQt8+HgzhSe91OSWjrnVK5r+keJ18ApvAwnw2ZwvF4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=nfc2Q/E0GC5j/opUbRiHRLrThE3HEGjNimf56MjinQUgzobOwED6Q9HwHx86pNH/w zK2+3eo5l0NY1/ve0/ZBL20JD0ggi2Bd5UFN474+iXTbIl24ysml7Q+6hCYNXqRpCb DI5q4fuNkSi0nMfxYm+4iqmLO6O7sZjyFYT9Dshec1K14E7Mv3NxyKX8c89MVp9vsX gKktFje9JchEFCGtv1hruSUeTNY7XRRyz+WzN9PQITxGJwtIfSbgbGDPwOvML2HYYW G5mKT4BtlDAQw/pjbSgEKTpRStsMY9W8I7oGHwQtSnZUG8pfjO5TEYBSvr4wCbDmEY h6DO7zyL6Dqmw== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Xf74j2jjmz4xPF; Thu, 31 Oct 2024 13:20:21 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 13:20:21 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni Cc: Kalle Valo , Johannes Berg , Wireless , Aditya Kumar Singh , Johannes Berg , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Miri Korenblit , Networking Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the wireless-next tree with the wireless tree Message-ID: <20241031132021.6c7eedb2@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20241028123621.7bbb131b@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20241028123621.7bbb131b@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/tnRE6..8MI65nh6OXU0jFZM"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 --Sig_/tnRE6..8MI65nh6OXU0jFZM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 12:36:21 +1100 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-next tree got a conflict in: >=20 > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/mld-mac80211.c >=20 > between commit: >=20 > cbe84e9ad5e2 ("wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: really send iwl_txpower_constraints_= cmd") >=20 > from the wireless tree and commit: >=20 > 188a1bf89432 ("wifi: mac80211: re-order assigning channel in activate l= inks") >=20 > from the wireless-next tree. >=20 > I fixed it up (the latter removed some code that the former moved some > other cde around - so I effectively just used the latter) 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. This is now a conflict between the net tree and the net-next tree. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/tnRE6..8MI65nh6OXU0jFZM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmci6WUACgkQAVBC80lX 0GxPxQf9FqLkRiEWj82juUiZPr9wMOiyF4uQDIPt0jxdY0Ipv33sN98/byCOjcLs U4tUVDB8ok7Wd6WAsoS9okoLovZCv8xYvMFk6ngV3iWmrR4y5clA1B2Stp7DKCtH 1wOJPy+IGleTTdc8+BMDAZ/T9iXjEhkDdKkQH0qSKAc7vsYJB/WgplzC/T4kyMK5 /44spSzjoDZG0t7Myvg1EU4S/KFPeo+CmkbzB8c7EK/YwMzXlTBUNLqb0wvN4HJg GJdtQxWy/dvjxXzzygeTPBaLjjmplLXQFHHFeOqdI7wz68CJ50mOtVfxi+aJ815H EmaBK70IitkmNeO4SSNPQHL3TNSauA== =trsc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/tnRE6..8MI65nh6OXU0jFZM--