[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201208114759.GA5246@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 13:47:59 +0200
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Qinglang Miao <miaoqinglang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with the pci tree
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 01:27:54PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/gpu/vga/vga_switcheroo.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 99efde6c9bb7 ("PCI/PM: Rename pci_wakeup_bus() to pci_resume_bus()")
>
> from the pci tree and commit:
>
> 9572e6693cd7 ("vga_switcheroo: simplify the return expression of vga_switcheroo_runtime_resume")
>
> from the drm 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.
Thanks for the fix Stephen! Looks correct to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists