[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72nu_2s=eGy9KbOZDU8LKUw6bczP1Sea1Pewuwvue7ovdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 10:05:09 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Adam Bratschi-Kaye <ark.email@...il.com>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boris-Chengbiao Zhou <bobo1239@....de>,
Finn Behrens <me@...enk.de>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>,
Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...gle.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>, Wu XiangCheng <bobwxc@...il.cn>,
Yuki Okushi <jtitor@...6.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rust tree with the kbuild tree
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:20 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> 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.
Looks good to me. Thanks!
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists