[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231016071659.qbc4s7syiv3zgqsk@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 09:16:59 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Wentong Wu <wentong.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the usb tree
Hello,
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 01:41:59PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the gpio-brgl tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-ljca.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 1034cc423f1b ("gpio: update Intel LJCA USB GPIO driver")
>
> from the usb tree and commit:
>
> da2ad5fe2292 ("gpio: ljca: Convert to platform remove callback returning void")
>
> from the gpio-brgl tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the former version) 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 right. As this isn't a platform_driver any more, dropping the
conversion to .remove_new is the right thing.
Thanks
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists