From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the omap_dss2 tree Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 11:50:11 +0000 Message-ID: <201203091150.11294.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20120308170048.f1a992bca2ca2d93fa9747bf@canb.auug.org.au> <201203081616.12510.arnd@arndb.de> <1331285751.1927.20.camel@deskari> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:51192 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751590Ab2CILua (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 06:50:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1331285751.1927.20.camel@deskari> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tomi Valkeinen 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 On Friday 09 March 2012, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 16:16 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thursday 08 March 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. > > > > Hi Stephen, > > > > 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. Each of the conflicts is simple enough, but I feel it's worth resolving them in this case because there are a number of them. Looking at them again now, it's probably ok either way -- resolving them now or letting Linus take care of 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. ok. > > 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. Ok. Maybe we'll just merge them in case Florian is upstream faster and not merge them otherwise. Arnd