[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200908140022.67dd3801@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 14:00:22 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Guru Das Srinagesh <gurus@...eaurora.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with Linus' tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in:
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_panel.c
between commit:
f8bd54d21904 ("drm/i915: panel: Use atomic PWM API for devs with an external PWM controller")
from Linus' tree and commit:
6b51e7d23aa8 ("drm/i915: panel: Honor the VBT PWM frequency for devs with an external PWM controller")
from the drm-intel tree.
I fixed it up (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.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists