[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <521CD111.9030905@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:17:21 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with Linus' tree
On 08/27/2013 02:29 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-trimslice.dts between commit
> 30ca2226bea6 ("ARM: tegra: always enable USB VBUS regulators") from
> Linus' tree and commit 23f95ef2d951 ("ARM: tegra: use TEGRA_GPIO()
> in a couple more places") from the arm-soc tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no
> action is required).
> diff --cc arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-trimslice.dts
> usb@...00000 { status = "okay"; - nvidia,vbus-gpio = <&gpio
> TEGRA_GPIO(V, 2) GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; };
That chunk isn't part of either of the two commits above.
It is however part of commit 103566e "arm: tegra: Remove obsolete
nvidia,vbus-gpio properties" from the USB tree, so it's fine that the
change is part of linux-next.
I'm just not sure if it's expected for that chunk to show up in this
merge resolution email? If it's normal, then there's no problem; the
issue would be with me not having too much git merge conflict
resolution experience:-)
--
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