From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756567Ab0LPPwh (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:52:37 -0500 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:39593 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755485Ab0LPPwf (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:52:35 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 07:52:25 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Felipe Balbi Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bob Liu , Mike Frysinger Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with Linus' tree Message-ID: <20101216155225.GA31363@kroah.com> References: <20101216140122.ca745f1f.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20101216030857.GA12785@kroah.com> <20101216080527.GA2601@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20101216084552.GD2601@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101216084552.GD2601@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:45:52AM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:05:27AM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:08:57PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > >>On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 02:01:22PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>>Hi Greg, > >>> > >>>Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got a conflict in > >>>drivers/usb/musb/blackfin.c drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c > >>>drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h between commit > >>>1e393c6eece048052d4131ec4dad3b98e35a98e2 ("USB: musb: blackfin: pm: make > >>>it work") from Linus' tree (v2.6.37-rc2) and various commits from the usb > >>>tree. > >>> > >>>It was not immediately obvious how to fix these up, so I just used the > >>>versions from the usb tree. This may not be correct and it would be good > >>>if this was fixed properly in the usb tree. > >> > >>Hm. Felipe, I'll merge in the -rc4 tree into usb-next if it makes sense > >>to do so now, can you send me the patch that ends up being the correct > >>merge? > > > >Sure, I'll check it now and send in a patch in a few minutes. > > There are two commits you didn't have in your usb-next branch which are > in mainline. Reverting them will make greg/usb-next apply cleanly on top > of v2.6.47-rc4. The commits are: > > 32d5dc9520f0c6f60f691dd478741c774e292406 : USB: musb: pm: don't rely fully on clock support > 1e393c6eece048052d4131ec4dad3b98e35a98e2 : USB: musb: blackfin: pm: make it work > > Do you want me to rebase on top of -rc4 or is reverting those two enough > for you ? As a sidenote, the series I sent you already fixes those two > cases as we moved PM and clock handling entirely to glue layer, so those > two cases are taken care of on the series, reverting those patches won't > pose any regressions. So, I should do the following things: take -rc6 revert the above commits merge with usb-next push out and all should be good, right? If so, that's fine with me, I'll do it today. If not, please let me know. thanks, greg k-h