linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the arm-soc 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:	Tue, 25 Feb 2014 08:56:32 -0800
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
	Steffen Trumtrar <s.trumtrar@...gutronix.de>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the arm-soc
 tree

On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 08:51:37AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 05:09:44PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi Greg,
> >>
> >> Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/imx53-qsb.dts between commit d5eb195f26fa ("ARM: dts:
> >> i.MX53: move common QSB nodes to new file") from the arm-soc tree and
> >> commit 17b5001b5143 ("imx-drm: convert to componentised device support")
> >> from the staging tree.
> >>
> >> I fixed it up (see at bottom) and can carry the fix as necessary (no
> >> action is required).  I also added the following fix up patch:
> >
> > I think it's right, but I really have no idea about any of these.  I'll
> > defer to Russell to ensure they are correct.
> 
> We normally merge all dts changes through arm-soc to avoid these kind
> of conflicts. Since your tree is a stable one there isn't much to do
> about it, but I'd appreciate it if we just got those parts of the
> patch series in the future to avoid these situations. We've been bit
> by it before.

I can revert these patches, but for some reason Russell said they should
go through this one, so I took them...

Russell, thoughts?

--
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/