linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the pci tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:20:45 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To:     Sivaprakash Murugesan <sivaprak@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@...il.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the pci tree

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 2:28 AM Sivaprakash Murugesan
<sivaprak@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>
> On 7/28/2020 11:19 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the devicetree tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.txt
> >
> > between commits:
> >
> >    736ae5c91712 ("dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Add missing clks")
> >    b11b8cc161de ("dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Add ext reset")
> >    d511580ea9c2 ("dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Add ipq8064 rev 2 variant")
> >
> > from the pci tree and commit:
> >
> >    70172d196947 ("dt-bindings: pci: convert QCOM pci bindings to YAML")
> >
> > from the devicetree tree.
> >
> > I don;t know how to fixed it up so I just left the latter one . 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.
>
> Rob/Bjorn,
>
> Please let me know if I can provide a patch rebased to linux-next.

A patch based on linux-next is useless unless you want it applied
after the next merge window because no one can apply it.

> Bjorn can pick up the patch after review and Rob can drop the old pci
> yaml conversion patch.

I'll drop it and it can go via the PCI tree. I have some minor fixups
I'll comment on.

Rob