linux-next: manual merge of the i.MX tree with the arm-soc tree

linux-next: manual merge of the i.MX tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]

Hi Sascha,

Today's linux-next merge of the i.MX tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/plat-mxc/devices/platform-pata_imx.c between commit 236c4e8be436
("ARM: imx: Add PATA resources for other i.MX processors") from the
arm-soc tree and commit 8354b5d2a1c5 ("ARM: imx: Add PATA resources for
other i.MX processors") from the i.MX tree.

The latter appears to be a corrected version of the former (despite
having the same Author date ...) so I used that.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the i.MX tree with the arm-soc tree

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hi Stephen,

(I'm responsible for this, as Sascha is on vacation.)

On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 11:44:36AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the i.MX tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/plat-mxc/devices/platform-pata_imx.c between commit 236c4e8be436
> ("ARM: imx: Add PATA resources for other i.MX processors") from the
> arm-soc tree and commit 8354b5d2a1c5 ("ARM: imx: Add PATA resources for
> other i.MX processors") from the i.MX tree.
> 
> The latter appears to be a corrected version of the former (despite
> having the same Author date ...) so I used that.
Yeah, if you look at the commit logs you will notice that the better
commit has an additional comment:

    [ukleinek: squashed in a fix by Arnaud Patard (Rtp) <arnaud.patard@rtp-net.o
    fixing the resource size calculation]

Arnd already promised me to replace the older version of the imx tree in
arm-soc with the current one. The problem is just that kernel.org is
down ...

Do you prefer that conflicts like these are resolved before you get
them?
(I.e. I could have done

	git merge -s ours $somecommitfromthearmsoctree

but I wasn't sure that this is a good idea and so decided to wait until
you write a mail about the conflict.)

Best regards
Uwe


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the i.MX tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 591 bytes --]

Hi Uwe,

On Fri, 9 Sep 2011 08:40:58 +0200 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Do you prefer that conflicts like these are resolved before you get
> them?
> (I.e. I could have done
> 
> 	git merge -s ours $somecommitfromthearmsoctree
> 
> but I wasn't sure that this is a good idea and so decided to wait until
> you write a mail about the conflict.)

No, these small conflicts are not a problem, so just leave them to me and
Arnd or Linus.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the i.MX tree with the arm-soc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1280 bytes --]

Hi Sascha,

Today's linux-next merge of the i.MX tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile between commit 91dc67d94810 ("Merge branch
'next/devel' of
git+ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm/linux-arm-soc
into for-next") from the arm-soc tree and commit ea754946551b ("Merge
branch 'imx-features' and 'imx-cleanup' into master") from the i.MX tree.

The conflict looks like this:

diff --cc arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile
index f87cc55,d22096a..0000000
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile
@@@ -3,7 -3,7 +3,11 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_IMX_HAVE_DMA_V1) += dma-v1
  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX1) += clock-imx1.o mm-imx1.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX21) += clock-imx21.o mm-imx21.o
  
++<<<<<<< HEAD
 +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_MX25) += clock-imx25.o mm-imx25.o ehci-imx25.o cpu-imx25.o
++=======
+ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX25) += clock-imx25.o mm-imx25.o ehci-imx25.o cpu-imx25.o
++>>>>>>> i.MX/for-next
  
  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX27) += cpu-imx27.o pm-imx27.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX27) += clock-imx27.o mm-imx27.o ehci-imx27.o

Given that there are no other references to SOC_MX25 in the resulting
tree, I used the latter version.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the i.MX tree with the arm-soc tree

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hello,

On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 11:40:16AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> The conflict looks like this:
> 
> diff --cc arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile
> index f87cc55,d22096a..0000000
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile
> @@@ -3,7 -3,7 +3,11 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_IMX_HAVE_DMA_V1) += dma-v1
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX1) += clock-imx1.o mm-imx1.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX21) += clock-imx21.o mm-imx21.o
>   
> ++<<<<<<< HEAD
>  +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_MX25) += clock-imx25.o mm-imx25.o ehci-imx25.o cpu-imx25.o
> ++=======
> + obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX25) += clock-imx25.o mm-imx25.o ehci-imx25.o cpu-imx25.o
> ++>>>>>>> i.MX/for-next
>   
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX27) += cpu-imx27.o pm-imx27.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_IMX27) += clock-imx27.o mm-imx27.o ehci-imx27.o
> 
> Given that there are no other references to SOC_MX25 in the resulting
> tree, I used the latter version.
That's right.

Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |