[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <521CAF59.1090203@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 15:53:29 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Benoit Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>
CC: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the usb tree
On 08/27/2013 03:24 PM, Benoit Cousson wrote:
> Hi Sebatian,
Hi Benoit,
> Yes. DT patches are an endless source of merge conflicts if they are
> merge throught different trees.
Usually there are small conflicts because two people added / changed a
node nearby. This patch turned the .dts file almost upside down.
> What was discussed with Olof and Arnd during Connect is that we should
> avoid merging DT patches outside arm-soc tree to avoid that kind of
> situation.
I am aware of this now. However these changes belonged together because
a) they belonged together and b) would break the driver until the .dts
changes and driver code is in-sync.
In future I am going to ask you for a topic branch so I can get my
changes in one piece without breaking stuff in the middle.
What do we do now?
> Regards,
> Benoit
Sebastian
--
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