[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171114232805.vvb5jbpf4fuwkw76@kekkonen.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 01:28:06 +0200
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Aishwarya Pant <aishpant@...il.com>,
Branislav Radocaj <branislav@...ocaj.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the media tree
Hi Stephen, Greg, others,
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 04:24:47PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 19:26:54 +0100 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > drivers/staging/media/atomisp/pci/atomisp2/css2400/sh_css_firmware.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 866af46e6ebbc ("media: Staging: atomisp: fix alloc_cast.cocci warnings")
> >
> > from the media tree and commit:
> >
> > 4d962df5a7771 ("atomisp2: remove cast from memory allocation")
> >
> > from the staging 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.
>
> Just a reminder that this conflict still exists.
Both patches essentially contain the same change, the difference is in the
indentation only. There's a number of atomisp patches in the media tree,
how about simply reverting the patch in the staging tree?
--
Regards,
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists