[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170124081615.GQ16020@dell>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 08:16:15 +0000
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@...com>,
Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
Fabrice GASNIER <fabrice.gasnier@...com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with the arm-soc tree
On Tue, 24 Jan 2017, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mfd tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32f429.dtsi
>
> between commits:
>
> 3604ef9c8154 ("ARM: dts: stm32: Add ADC support to stm32f429")
> dd3feb755a4a ("ARM: dts: stm32: Add RTC support for STM32F429 MCU")
>
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>
> 9072b6b2ba83 ("ARM: dts: stm32: add Timers driver for stm32f429 MCU")
>
> from the mfd tree.
An immutable branch as already been posted for this.
> 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.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists