[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201304051532.46156.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 15:32:45 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
John Linn <John.Linn@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the xilinx tree
On Friday 05 April 2013, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > Interesting. I rebased my arm-next branch based on 3.9-rc5
> > > with some Rob's + one Arnd patch from arm-soc - clksrc/cleanup branch.
> > >
> > > I will fix my arm-next branch.
> >
> > The for-next branch in arm-soc is not stable, you should never base
> > anything on it. If you depend on some stable branch, that is in arm-soc,
> > then use just that branch, not one of the next/* branches or for-next.
> >
>
> I haven't based on arm-soc for-next branch my arm-next branch.
> I just took all patches I need for zynq and done git rebase v3.5-rc5.
> Which caused that I have became commuter of that 4 patches
> and there is probably any conflict between your for-next branch and
> clksrc/cleanup
> which you have resolved in for-next branch.
Ah, I see. That was actually my fault, I'm sorry for causing trouble
here and then accusing you instead.
> And because of my rebase sha1 are different that's why Stephen
> had problem with it.
> I have changed my arm-next branch and will see on Monday if Stephen
> will report any problem or not.
Ok, thanks!
Arnd
--
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