From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751447AbdAaFs2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:48:28 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:55291 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751328AbdAaFjo (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:39:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:29:51 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Linus Walleij Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marek Szyprowski , Krzysztof Kozlowski Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the pinctrl tree with the arm-soc tree Message-ID: <20170131162951.3de4bcd6@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Linus, Today's linux-next merge of the pinctrl tree got a conflict in: arch/arm/mach-exynos/suspend.c between commit: b4765037fc8c ("ARM: EXYNOS: Constify list of retention registers") from the arm-soc tree and commit: 07731019c59c ("pinctrl: samsung: Move retention control from mach-exynos to the pinctrl driver") from the pinctrl tree. I fixed it up (the latter removed the code updated by the former, so I just did that) 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. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell