linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the arm 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:16:58 +0100
From:	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the arm tree

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:09:52PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:30:41PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 07:20:13AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Arnd,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got a conflict in
> > > arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/memory.h between commit c039bad00f21
> > > ("ARM: plat-mxc: remove mach/memory.h") from the arm tree and commits
> > > ae4fa7f66e54 ("ARM i.MX: allow to compile together ARMv4 and ARMv5 based
> > > SoCs") and 7409cd1cd554 ("ARM i.MX: allow to compile together all i.MX5
> > > based SoCs") from the arm-soc tree.
> > > 
> > > The former removed the file, so I did that.
> > 
> > Stephen - thanks.
> > 
> > ARM guys, we need to be smarter about this stuff - if we're consolidating
> > code across the ARM tree, committing changes to files which we're going
> > to remove really isn't a good idea.  It probably means something else has
> > changed elsewhere to accomodate the deletion of the file, which this
> > kind of resolution won't fix up.
> 
> In this case deleting the file is the correct solution. I removed some
> definitions of PLAT_PHYS_OFFSET which got unused due to "ARM i.MX: allow
> to compile together..." and Nicolas removed the need for PLAT_PHYS_OFFSET
> at all.

Ok, at least this one is trivial.  Thanks for the confirmation.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
--
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/