[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170828064921.GA24696@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:49:21 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Sameer Wadgaonkar <sameer.wadgaonkar@...sys.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the staging tree
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 04:41:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/staging/unisys/visorhba/visorhba_main.c
>
> between commits:
>
> 781facd05eb9 ("staging: unisys: visorhba: visorhba_main.c: fixed comment formatting issues")
>
> from the staging tree and commit:
>
> 7bc4e528d9f6 ("scsi: visorhba: sanitze private device data allocation")
>
> from the scsi 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.
Ick, messy merge, thanks for doing this.
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists