From: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
andrew@lunn.ch, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 14:49:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bna92c5b.fsf@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2428665.BrOON4cELy@wuerfel> (Arnd Bergmann's message of "Wed, 02 Dec 2015 12:21:21 +0100")
Hi Arnd,
On mer., déc. 02 2015, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 December 2015 11:18:29 Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:12:44AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in between commit
>> > 377524dc4d77f50e ("ARM: mmp: move into ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM") from the arm-soc
>> > tree and commit 5f4423af9dd17 ("ARM: orion: multiplatform support") from the
>> > mvebu tree.
>>
>> Ccing in Arnd since I forgot to do that.
>>
>
> I was planning to merge all the multiplatform changes into one next/multiplatform
> branch, but the mvebu maintainers preferred to keep this one in their
> tree at
Indeed except the arch/arm/Kconfig file all the other files belong to
the mbebu subsystem and it is easier to to keep in our tree to handle them.
> least initially. The conflict will go away once it's tested sufficiently and
> I'm pulling it back.
By the way, when you will pull our tree, we will still have it our own
mvebu/for-next branch. Will git managed to automagically resolve the
conflict by getting the resolution you will do in your branch?
A another solution could be to have a separate patch for the
arch/arm/Kconfig file that you keep in arm-soc.
Grégory
--
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: gregory.clement@free-electrons.com (Gregory CLEMENT)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 14:49:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bna92c5b.fsf@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2428665.BrOON4cELy@wuerfel> (Arnd Bergmann's message of "Wed, 02 Dec 2015 12:21:21 +0100")
Hi Arnd,
On mer., d?c. 02 2015, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 December 2015 11:18:29 Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:12:44AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got a conflict in between commit
>> > 377524dc4d77f50e ("ARM: mmp: move into ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM") from the arm-soc
>> > tree and commit 5f4423af9dd17 ("ARM: orion: multiplatform support") from the
>> > mvebu tree.
>>
>> Ccing in Arnd since I forgot to do that.
>>
>
> I was planning to merge all the multiplatform changes into one next/multiplatform
> branch, but the mvebu maintainers preferred to keep this one in their
> tree at
Indeed except the arch/arm/Kconfig file all the other files belong to
the mbebu subsystem and it is easier to to keep in our tree to handle them.
> least initially. The conflict will go away once it's tested sufficiently and
> I'm pulling it back.
By the way, when you will pull our tree, we will still have it our own
mvebu/for-next branch. Will git managed to automagically resolve the
conflict by getting the resolution you will do in your branch?
A another solution could be to have a separate patch for the
arch/arm/Kconfig file that you keep in arm-soc.
Gr?gory
--
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-02 13:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-02 11:12 linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc tree Mark Brown
2015-12-02 11:12 ` Mark Brown
2015-12-02 11:12 ` Mark Brown
2015-12-02 11:18 ` Mark Brown
2015-12-02 11:18 ` Mark Brown
2015-12-02 11:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-12-02 11:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-12-02 13:49 ` Gregory CLEMENT [this message]
2015-12-02 13:49 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-12-02 15:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-12-02 15:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-05-09 23:41 Stephen Rothwell
2022-05-09 23:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-05-10 13:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-05-10 13:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-05-10 14:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-05-10 14:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-05-16 22:47 Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-16 22:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-04-11 22:34 Stephen Rothwell
2017-04-11 22:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-04-12 8:23 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2017-04-12 8:23 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2017-04-12 10:51 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-04-12 10:51 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-04-13 23:29 Stephen Rothwell
2016-04-13 23:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-04-13 23:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-17 23:33 Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-17 23:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-17 23:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-31 23:35 Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-31 23:35 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-31 23:35 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-01-13 0:20 Stephen Rothwell
2015-01-13 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-01-13 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-01-13 1:05 ` Andrew Lunn
2015-01-13 1:05 ` Andrew Lunn
2014-05-06 1:07 Stephen Rothwell
2014-05-06 1:07 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-05-06 1:07 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-05-06 1:13 ` Olof Johansson
2014-05-06 1:13 ` Olof Johansson
2014-05-06 1:13 ` Olof Johansson
2014-03-18 0:21 Stephen Rothwell
2014-03-18 0:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-03-18 0:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-02-26 1:46 Stephen Rothwell
2014-02-26 1:46 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-02-26 1:46 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-19 6:05 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-19 6:05 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-19 6:05 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-19 20:57 ` Jason Cooper
2013-08-19 20:57 ` Jason Cooper
2013-08-19 21:09 ` Olof Johansson
2013-08-19 21:09 ` Olof Johansson
2013-08-19 21:09 ` Olof Johansson
2013-08-19 21:38 ` Jason Cooper
2013-08-19 21:38 ` Jason Cooper
2013-08-19 21:38 ` Jason Cooper
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bna92c5b.fsf@free-electrons.com \
--to=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.