linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the pinctrl tree with the irqchip 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210817200412.799bd992@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:04:12 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@...k-chips.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the pinctrl tree with the irqchip tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the pinctrl tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c

between commit:

  a9cb09b7be84 ("pinctrl: Bulk conversion to generic_handle_domain_irq()")

from the irqchip tree and commit:

  9ce9a02039de ("pinctrl/rockchip: drop the gpio related codes")

from the pinctrl tree.

I fixed it up (the latter removed the code changed by the former, so I
did that) 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