[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120518084446.a7b229074ea215fd7bcd1eb8@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 08:44:46 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
plagnioj@...osoft.com, maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com,
olof@...om.net, linux-next@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: Add ADC driver to at91sam9260/at91sam9g20
dtsi files
Hi all,
On Thu, 17 May 2012 08:06:01 -0700 Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 06:50:54PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 May 2012, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> > > Now that the bulk of at91sam9g20-related nodes are located in at91sam9260.dtsi,
> > > we have to re-create the path to this ADC node for SoC specific parts.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
> >
> > Should we apply this patch in arm-soc so that Greg can drop the hunk that
> > no longer applies?
>
> It's not a "no longer applies", it's a "this does not merge". The patch
> is in my tree, unless you want me to revert it, it's going to stay there
> until it goes to Linus.
Just apply the patch to the arm-soc tree - then the merge resolution
becomes "use the arm-soc version". There is no need for Greg to revert
the other patch.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists