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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C495C10F0E for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:49:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA8120674 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:49:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="Z8mjcjZu"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="BeFIejL7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389189AbfDRNtI (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2019 09:49:08 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:60932 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388073AbfDRNtH (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2019 09:49:07 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C230C6086B; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:49:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1555595346; bh=0+qifr9xO9IbP3wkVCtTen21O2jfNgRqZTzi3+4eezo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Z8mjcjZuapBjuinor0LLVkHoLipMdBvt8IrIInX7i2NmPR/DAfCFFJvXS1IGOxyiE YtIwu/rzPR88ZWdLHzYWeCR12mVccGI1ilnrnZwXYiYxR/eryQdsQcVhTpE9omchSa y+LfA8WPtbzMgouUZqtKp1bAh1UwEJ20Zgfo7p30= Received: from potku.adurom.net (88-114-240-156.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69A546086B; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:49:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1555595345; bh=0+qifr9xO9IbP3wkVCtTen21O2jfNgRqZTzi3+4eezo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BeFIejL7h7WiCanmXBjzMhCfzOCrZ3PJ69mFqpVQnAcGl+smN2hqBx/TJbfbaquIz i1p7bRRKcyM/pKtPT2sp3HUFcC0Z14ogTMzEfGM1HnOc4b2VuFiOMxFFyUtaTKQ+I/ 6o+2a//ae//f6K0CSglpXQgB8byDg2P02dZnSd38= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 69A546086B Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Wireless , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Shahar S Matityahu , Luca Coelho Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree with the wireless-drivers tree References: <20190415120133.40c0f343@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:49:02 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20190415120133.40c0f343@canb.auug.org.au> (Stephen Rothwell's message of "Mon, 15 Apr 2019 12:01:33 +1000") Message-ID: <87o9532zld.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree got a conflict > in: > > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-trans.h > > between commit: > > 07d35b4270ef ("iwlwifi: use sync nmi in case of init flow failure") > > from the wireless-drivers tree and commit: > > 4b1831e48974 ("iwlwifi: dbg_ini: support HW error trigger") > > from the wireless-drivers-next 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. Thanks, I'll let Dave know about this when he pulls w-d-next. -- Kalle Valo