[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160822065654.GY6232@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 08:56:54 +0200
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marIT.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the jc_docs tree with the drm-misc
tree
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:50:09AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:52:15 +1000
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> > Today's linux-next merge of the jc_docs tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > Documentation/gpu/index.rst
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > b754b35b089d ("vgaarbiter: rst-ifiy and polish kerneldoc")
> >
> > from the drm-misc tree and commit:
> >
> > 505f711174b0 ("doc-rst: add index to sub-folders")
> >
> > from the jc_docs tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
>
> Thanks, the fix is good.
>
> Daniel: my apologies, I should have asked for that patch to be split up
> and the relevant pieces sent through the gpu and media trees.
No worries, as far as conflicts go this one is trivial ;-) And I think a
few conflicts while we shake out best practices for the new doc
infrastructure in various trees is perfectly fine.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
Powered by blists - more mailing lists