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 xilinx tree Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 15:32:45 +0200 Message-ID: <201304051532.46156.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20130405153335.baf29606a97b1bee415f3546@canb.auug.org.au> <201304051409.37708.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Michal Simek Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Olof Johansson , John Linn , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Friday 05 April 2013, Michal Simek wrote: > > > Interesting. I rebased my arm-next branch based on 3.9-rc5 > > > with some Rob's + one Arnd patch from arm-soc - clksrc/cleanup branch. > > > > > > I will fix my arm-next branch. > > > > The for-next branch in arm-soc is not stable, you should never base > > anything on it. If you depend on some stable branch, that is in arm-soc, > > then use just that branch, not one of the next/* branches or for-next. > > > > I haven't based on arm-soc for-next branch my arm-next branch. > I just took all patches I need for zynq and done git rebase v3.5-rc5. > Which caused that I have became commuter of that 4 patches > and there is probably any conflict between your for-next branch and > clksrc/cleanup > which you have resolved in for-next branch. Ah, I see. That was actually my fault, I'm sorry for causing trouble here and then accusing you instead. > And because of my rebase sha1 are different that's why Stephen > had problem with it. > I have changed my arm-next branch and will see on Monday if Stephen > will report any problem or not. Ok, thanks! Arnd