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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 35459C433DB for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 06:31:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91DEB65014 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 06:31:05 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 91DEB65014 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kroah.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DsHtc1B8jz3cKP for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 17:31:04 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kroah.com header.i=@kroah.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=PjBL2jSn; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=b4SrAHEA; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kroah.com (client-ip=64.147.123.20; helo=wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=greg@kroah.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kroah.com header.i=@kroah.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=PjBL2jSn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=b4SrAHEA; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DsHt408TDz2xb3 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 17:30:34 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7642A00; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 01:30:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 05 Mar 2021 01:30:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kroah.com; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=z0riIZi5FSZ5sfGxEHxuYs+9uZd cZEnOkxz+llR8sCA=; b=PjBL2jSnh2FJkdiQgeBfXVFETmKAg2kP824aPWYPXuC 5wK+E07/2EyPkMZseT+8pCoLv8h5ZUTTWyw7OItXY4DttekdgoNKA2sIwr47+yHJ Q+gbQ/z/RTm2OwkZuICa3vDkhpN02RudG6or97wyqURtQNEO3kDQkAOJtBIXdwxm UY46eT9hgFJ646M0YmDnAw+e1R6mT1YFvP8tfDcvvYD+AzDCAiNAUIp544O+ijyf pqGJP+pHLweu1zC6vXLlDPVXoL5BuZTXY+7KbkS5moBEs3ruo6CDA/gIIDQcaZaT 5UwUjBZ4tMa63fT/kVLpAO1E7XkY1vhURkwwJgiE+PA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=z0riIZ i5FSZ5sfGxEHxuYs+9uZdcZEnOkxz+llR8sCA=; b=b4SrAHEAfD4C5m0bxvDeuT 08BGpIxulyKA63AYN8PkUrZdBBT1FKzdaT0ZWfb+L36VX/GEl/ywECY6MWsaCQJj w19ZO6HFKS+OD4bDPEKM0hK/kYa/LvTPxjSjQDPSa4Ae7rQxoWX4hnrs7xfoXyzH nL2E8+ogXweEIe2rIo/HvSj9SxJGU41bgShlIN8Zmsm0+RGrRWhfDd45s5duNEut l1X5Ck1erzKlGnZQMFcEZ90UTT7hqQV/nkLGi5YV+7cjZ5OzOMQ//fM2V8EdxJJ4 Qv1vGqzQZK8w4MZJNu9X++KylorgZg65jEU7BKoUFSlAaG2nORrSLb9l4vLBCHaQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledruddthedgleduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehttdortddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefirhgvghcu mffjuceoghhrvghgsehkrhhorghhrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeevhefgje eitdfffefhvdegleeigeejgeeiffekieffjeeflefhieegtefhudejueenucfkphepkeef rdekiedrjeegrdeigeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrih hlfhhrohhmpehgrhgvgheskhhrohgrhhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (83-86-74-64.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.74.64]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A6D721080057; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 01:30:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 07:30:25 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tty tree with the powerpc-fixes tree Message-ID: References: <20210305120523.0cb114b9@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210305120523.0cb114b9@canb.auug.org.au> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Jiri Slaby , PowerPC , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Jiri Slaby Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 12:05:23PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/tty/hvc/hvcs.c > > between commit: > > 386a966f5ce7 ("vio: make remove callback return void") > > from the powerpc-fixes tree and commit: > > fb8d350c291c ("tty: hvc, drop unneeded forward declarations") > > from the tty tree. > > I fixed it up (they both removed the forward decalrartion of > hvcs_remove(), but the latter removed more) 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, that's the correct fix, we knew this was going to happen :( greg k-h