Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the s390 tree

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 05:01:19PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in
> > arch/s390/kernel/time.c between commit
> > 6342887c12d79c5a2c8c1de5be6f483e16a2acdd ("[S390] introduce
> > get_clock_monotonic") from the s390 tree and commit
> > 23970e389e9cee43c4b41023935e1417271708b2 ("timekeeping: Introduce
> > read_boot_clock") from the tip tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> 
> I reverted the sched_clock_base_cc rename. The merge conflict
> should be gone as soon as Martin pushes a new tree out.

thanks Heiko.

Note that such simpler conflicts can be kept just fine (i.e. there's 
no hard need to revert) - especially now that Stephen has already 
resolved it and tested the end result, and git-rerere will pick it 
up in the future too.

The most valuable conflicts in linux-next are the ones that show 
conflicts that should never occur: which happen due to trees doing 
changes they should not do.

	Ingo