linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the qcom 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YUnaJolAAZmhs4kU@ripper>
Date:   Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:12:06 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Baruch Siach <baruch@...s.co.il>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kathiravan T <kathirav@...eaurora.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the qcom tree

On Mon 20 Sep 19:30 PDT 2021, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   261e8a95d9aa ("arm64: dts: qcom: ipq6018: add usb3 DT description")
> 
> from the qcom tree and commit:
> 
>   9da2c3f76164 ("arm64: qcom: ipq6018: add usb3 DT description")
> 

Greg, this is not a USB patch, can you please drop it from your tree.

Thanks,
Bjorn

> from the usb tree.
> 
> Same author, same date, but the former has this committer comment:
> 
> bjorn: Changed dwc3 node name to usb, per binding
> 
> So I used that version.
> 
> I fixed it up (see above) 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