[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ilxh5yph.fsf@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 11:40:42 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>,
Miri Korenblit <miriam.rachel.korenblit@...el.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kspp tree with the wireless-drivers-next tree
(adding Jakub and Dave so that they are aware of this)
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kspp tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/fw/api/tx.h
>
> between commit:
>
> dc52fac37c87 ("iwlwifi: mvm: Support new TX_RSP and COMPRESSED_BA_RES versions")
>
> from the wireless-drivers-next tree and commit:
>
> fa7845cfd53f ("treewide: Replace open-coded flex arrays in unions")
>
> from the kspp 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.
I don't know what kspp tree is and either I don't know why they didn't
submit the patch to wireless-drivers-next, so I assume they will handle
the conflict as well. But I really prefer that they would submit patches
to wireless-drivers-next instead to avoid unnecessary conflicts like
this.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Powered by blists - more mailing lists