public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Gilad Broner <gbroner@codeaurora.org>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the block tree
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 08:17:58 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1478621878.2824.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161108164804.0aef27e8@canb.auug.org.au>

On Tue, 2016-11-08 at 16:48 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e806402130c9 ("block: split out request-only flags into a new
> namespace")
> 
> from the block tree and commit:
> 
>   2266d5678ad1 ("scsi: ufs: fix sense buffer size to 18 bytes")
> 
> from the scsi 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 for doing this.  I think this is exactly the type of easily
resolvable conflict Linus likes to fix himself, so keeping the trees
separate seems the best options.

Regards,

James

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-08 16:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-08  5:48 linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the block tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-11-08 16:17 ` James Bottomley [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-06-19  5:35 Stephen Rothwell
2017-06-21  5:55 Stephen Rothwell
2019-02-18  5:10 Stephen Rothwell
2019-04-15  5:59 Stephen Rothwell
2019-04-15 13:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-04-17 19:11   ` Martin Wilck
2020-03-25  5:04 Stephen Rothwell
2021-08-24  6:32 Stephen Rothwell
2021-08-24  6:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-01  5:08 Stephen Rothwell
2022-03-07  4:14 Stephen Rothwell
2022-03-07  4:18 Stephen Rothwell
2023-06-19  3:14 Stephen Rothwell
2025-01-07  4:09 Stephen Rothwell
2025-01-07  6:03 ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1478621878.2824.6.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
    --to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=gbroner@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=subhashj@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox