linux-kernel - RE: linux-next: manual merge of the input tree with the s5p tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 06 Aug 2010 09:43:34 +0900
From:	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
To:	'Stephen Rothwell' <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	'Joonyoung Shim' <jy0922.shim@...sung.com>,
	'Kyungmin Park' <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	'Dmitry Torokhov' <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Subject: RE: linux-next: manual merge of the input tree with the s5p tree

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:46:55 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the input tree got a conflict in
> > arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/keypad.h between commit
> > 1e3241300503df18a098dd35098f6975dcf622e2 ("ARM: SAMSUNG: Add keypad
> > device support") from the s5p tree and commit
> > 0fffed27f92d9d7a34de9fe017b7082b5958bb93 ("Input: samsung-keypad - Add
> > samsung keypad driver") from the input tree.
> >
> > This just looks like two versions of the same driver (or two drivers
> > sharing the same header) - please sort this out.  I have fixed up the
> > header for today (by including both versions where necessary).
> 
> I got this again (something obviously changed a little) but the input
> tree version is now in Linus' tree.  Please fix this up.

Hi Stephen,

Yeah,

I know that Dmitry's 'Input: samsung-keypad...patch' which includes
plat/keypad.h has been merged Linus' tree in this merge window.
And Joonyoung's another patch which is in my tree needs to update it, but my
tree is don't having it against Linus' 2.6.35.

So happened conflict...how can/should I handle this...
Should I rebase my tree against Linus' latest?

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/