[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221019154907.33bbcb52@xps-13>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 15:49:07 +0200
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
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 mtd tree with the mtd-fixes
tree
Hi,
sfr@...b.auug.org.au wrote on Wed, 19 Oct 2022 18:08:07 +1100:
> Hi Rafał,
>
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 07:31:57 +0200 Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl> wrote:
> >
> > this isn't exactly the correct fix, of_node_get() is still needed.
> >
> > I'll make sure we let Linus know about this conflict (and solution) when
> > sending 6.2 pull request.
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> > index 07249af4f890..20fcedc3021e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> > @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ static void mtd_check_of_node(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > if (!mtd_is_partition(mtd))
> > return;
> >
> > - parent_dn = mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent);
> > + parent_dn = of_node_get(mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent));
> > if (!parent_dn)
> > return;
> >
>
>
> Thanks for checking. I have added that to my resolution for tomorrow
> onward.
Thanks Rafał for the right resolution and Stephen for carrying the fix.
I'll send the fixes PR soon and rebase on top of an -rc containing it
to avoid this conflict resolution to be needed when sending the final
PR to Linus during the next MW.
Thanks,
Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists