[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2025070903-census-heavily-929a@gregkh>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 10:18:11 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
Larisa Grigore <Larisa.Grigore@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
"Radu Pirea (NXP OSS)" <radu-nicolae.pirea@....nxp.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the imx-mxs tree
On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 05:21:38PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got conflicts in:
>
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/s32g2.dtsi
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/s32g3.dtsi
>
> between commit:
>
> 06ee2f0e2180 ("arm64: dts: Add DSPI entries for S32G platforms")
>
> from the imx-mxs tree and commit:
>
> d1b07cc0868f ("arm64: dts: s32g: Add USB device tree information for s32g2/s32g3")
>
> from the usb 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.
Looks good to me, thanks!
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists