[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F630F29.6020101@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 03:00:09 -0700
From: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the s5p tree
On 03/16/12 01:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 16 March 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got a conflict in
>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c between commit 1d7233ac478a ("Merge branch
>> 'next/soc-exynos5250-arch-gpio' into for-next") from the s5p tree and
>> commit 853a0231e057 ("Merge branch 'samsung/soc' into next/soc2") from
>> the arm-soc tree.
>>
>> These merge commits both looks suspect, but I fixed it up as best I could
>> (see below).
>
Thank you, Stehpen.
> Right, both the arm-soc and the s5p tree merge the same commits and
> come to different results. Kgene, please have a look and let me know
> which of the three solutions is correct.
>
Yeah, my resolution is missing and both looks OK to me, actually it's
just different the position of declaration for 'int ret' and I'm not
sure which one is better even though I fixed with Arnd's resolution.
Arnd, Stephen, 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists