[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160930054430.GB5458@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:44:30 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Aleksey Makarov <aleksey.makarov@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tty tree with the arm64 tree
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:38:22PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got conflicts in:
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 1d8f51d41fc7 ("arm/arm64: arch_timer: Use archdata to indicate vdso suitability")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> 888125a71298 ("ARM64: ACPI: enable ACPI_SPCR_TABLE")
>
> from the tty tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
Looks good to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists