From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomi Valkeinen Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the omap_dss2 tree Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 11:35:51 +0200 Message-ID: <1331285751.1927.20.camel@deskari> References: <20120308170048.f1a992bca2ca2d93fa9747bf@canb.auug.org.au> <201203081616.12510.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-KXNJ+UUi1kqhm09Jig4v" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201203081616.12510.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Olof Johansson , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren , Florian Tobias Schandinat List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org --=-KXNJ+UUi1kqhm09Jig4v Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 16:16 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 08 March 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > >=20 > > Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got a conflict in > > arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-palmtt.c between commit ddba6c7f7ec6 ("OMAP1: > > pass LCD config with omapfb_set_lcd_config()") from the omap_dss2 tree > > and commit 2e3ee9f45b3c ("ARM: OMAP1: Move most of plat/io.h into local > > iomap.h") from the arm-soc tree. > >=20 > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. >=20 > Hi Stephen, >=20 > Thanks for fixing up all the conflicts between arm-soc and omap_dss2. > I think we should make sure they are resolved in one of the trees before > the merge window. Do we need to? The conflicts seemed to be trivial ones, like arm-soc adds/removes something that just happens to be next to something else that I add/remove. My understanding is that it's better to leave those conflicts than to do "trickery" to avoid them. > Tomi, what are your plans for the omap_dss2 branch to get merged? Normally my tree goes via fbdev-tree (Florian's tree) to mainline. > Do you think you should send it to Linus first and we merge it into > arm-soc to resolve the conflicts? > Or do you want to merge it through the arm-soc tree? > Or should we go first and you fix up the conflicts by pulling in the > necessary topic branches from arm-soc into your tree? If we want to resolve the conflicts, perhaps it's simplest if the dss tree is merged to arm-soc. Tomi --=-KXNJ+UUi1kqhm09Jig4v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJPWc73AAoJEPo9qoy8lh71We4P/119Va7GDm09S1ocK861kNdn OhpSdW4MxJzSIiJ5I0aufw0Kg5FqAsOt/iknxZoXzANrl5x+kO9r2n2WMDDb3qjt GIbTac+2J9gShVuo/5dPsXY+vWR8PonBlJtiL4yun8l4dEfIvzoa3GyXGdFGWmwd 2EdWgU6HRNBjRsgLHna8j+z6ZYXJViC9BumPIbXOGXi1nvIh1AZEbN8PcuVjzxu1 osfKCXBaG88xnOx3VjXIabaNFOvz7UkBFhvKhnJp0jerD9vuKV5fHImDC5tvS6Vm OXF13r/G8eDqck8quuNTqunk2DbJuy3uXskw+blaLwZ9uQTP0Lt3eCljt3Hp0jy2 w7XlnkAUpWFsSht7FCPHKfZnyQJ25a9HO/qXXMalWYS0J4f0idp0Xc40r2Vy+l6U rkVWtW4Er4C18wvYYqJ8g9fz3uiU5+0eBPoucmFVMFKEG9tnBTCwQRJctCpc2pp7 cuve+id8Vorw2Bs1pyK6aIrlfRoqr5at5a3QycAZc2Wqn1898F1PG1kyfo0aR6Ei W9G4SAD03ZF5smvjCTRBY7CMA4ycwSDjkS7SIFWalv0YYTTt9BXf6NLMFd0uP14m KyyuPEoAJBDI4HyCP69l6QMieywECalD1IMi6FZGA816eAs+kRn0ZHZeRat1WOdi cwCsyAxE3f+nWYP1SEzG =Hyu4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-KXNJ+UUi1kqhm09Jig4v--