[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200401114234.7b34320b@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 11:42:34 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Willy Wolff <willy.mh.wolff.ml@...il.com>,
Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the thermal tree
Hi all,
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 13:32:40 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c
>
> between commit:
>
> ff44f672d741 ("thermal/drivers/cpufreq_cooling: Fix return of cpufreq_set_cur_state")
>
> from the thermal tree and commit:
>
> f12e4f66ab6a ("thermal/cpu-cooling: Update thermal pressure in case of a maximum frequency capping")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter seems to include the former, so I just used
> the latter) 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.
This is now a conflict between the thermal tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists