From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree with Linus' tree Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:44:55 +0300 Message-ID: <87poblflzc.fsf@codeaurora.org> References: <20170824111753.2b1c508e@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:59398 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751124AbdHXHpB (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 03:45:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170824111753.2b1c508e@canb.auug.org.au> (Stephen Rothwell's message of "Thu, 24 Aug 2017 11:17:53 +1000") Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Wireless , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Emmanuel Grumbach , Luca Coelho , David Miller (Adding Dave so that he is also aware of this) Stephen Rothwell writes: > As expetced, today's linux-next merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree > got a conflict in: > > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c > > between commit: > > 92b0f7b26b31 ("iwlwifi: split the regulatory rules when the bandwidth flags require it") > > from Linus' tree and commit: > > b823cf3bae81 ("iwlwifi: update channel flags parser") > > from the wireless-drivers-next tree. > > I fixed it up (see below - Luca, Kalle, thanks for the heads 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. Thanks for the report. There were quite a few conflicts in iwlwifi so I'm planning to merge wireless-drivers to wireless-drivers-next today so that the conflicts are fixed before I submit them to Dave. -- Kalle Valo