linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-misc tree with the arm tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160622082336.GN23520@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:	Wed, 22 Jun 2016 10:23:36 +0200
From:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:	Russell King <rmk@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-misc tree with the arm tree

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 09:21:11AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 09:31:18AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:47 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the drm-misc tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > >   drivers/gpu/drm/sti/sti_drv.c
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > >   062993b15e8e ("drm: convert DT component matching to component_match_add_release()")
> > 
> > Why did that one end up in the arm tree? Should it go in through
> > drm-misc instead?
> 
> Mine is part of a three part patch series which is part of the component
> helper updates (which I'm the author and maintainer of).
> 
> Then someone came up with an alternative way of some of part of it.
> 
> You can't merge the above DRM part, because that means you also need to
> merge patch 1, which is core component stuff.

Makes sense, but generally in that case I ask Dave for an explicit ack for
merging through another tree to avoid confusion. Lack of that is why I
asked.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch