From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36010C352A1 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 15:09:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234761AbiLFPJQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2022 10:09:16 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33376 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234861AbiLFPIv (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2022 10:08:51 -0500 Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACBDA2DAA2; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:04:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1670339099; x=1701875099; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=4gaANcgDLtpQVPsnEy3VGI5ie3X6MSAD+xjymeHx3S0=; b=bIzsBl3SrP/ieuvPOyBdWZ2Nh2vd5Ro8XIrYSjkpA9J4kq/2IGTYgKuK U+jxr70fka/XcUWehJwNUfhLZ4YjlQ1Kjhi96290I78PgVUu/G14+4/ta 3jMIsTjRvnHLylPHCf3NFVyuZ11T7DQDMWuKaXpenb1JQjg+s7ChRUKbv Xuj1+Dktsls5wXbXi2PywmAMlb5zTYEl+tmjDemXniGMyoJxs395xGwGX a7d2YoZbqVfuaVeGBgQOJDH/kVvdhkgrs27UiZrVn6+cGs1UdaFbG0RYG /xT+kHHu8exiTC4bgPlCrWBMXXdnX+YyqVSiiZ8aO42anUJAGfeQzxk33 Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10553"; a="402918530" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,222,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="402918530" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Dec 2022 07:04:55 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10553"; a="677002574" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,222,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="677002574" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Dec 2022 07:04:45 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1p2ZUy-005M2F-0T; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 17:04:44 +0200 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 17:04:43 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Linus Walleij , Olof Johansson , Arnd Bergmann , ARM , Dmitry Torokhov , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pinctrl tree with the arm-soc tree Message-ID: References: <20221206121336.474457bb@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221206121336.474457bb@canb.auug.org.au> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 12:13:36PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the pinctrl tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/soc/fsl/qe/gpio.c > > between commits: > > 84582f9ed090 ("soc: fsl: qe: Avoid using gpio_to_desc()") > 66310b5a0fc1 ("soc: fsl: qe: request pins non-exclusively") > > from the arm-soc tree and commit: > > c9eb6e546a23 ("soc: fsl: qe: Switch to use fwnode instead of of_node") > > from the pinctrl tree. > > I fixed it up (see below) 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. That's correct fix in my opinion. Thank you! How to avoid conflict and why it's there I have explained here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/Y43ij5rwNLOaztch@smile.fi.intel.com/ -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko