[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56448E9475A7CD4F97A754616F76B45780C65F@CHN-SV-EXMX07.mchp-main.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:50:57 +0000
From: <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>
To: <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
<olof@...om.net>, <arnd@...db.de>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
<alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <peda@...ntia.se>
Subject: RE: linux-next: manual merge of the at91 tree with the arm-soc tree
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the at91 tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-tse850-3.dts
> between commit:
>
> e67cedc92812 ("ARM: dts: at91: add envelope detector mux to the Axentia TSE-850")
>
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>
> 29dd89418007 ("ARM: dts: at91: add envelope detector mux to the Axentia TSE-850")
>
> from the at91 tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I used the arm-soc tree version) 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.
Stephen,
Yes, the use of arm-soc version was the way to go. I now have updated my at91-next tree to match Alexandre's pull-request and hope it is not in conflict anymore.
Thanks for your fix.
Best regards,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists