From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with Linus' tree Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 14:04:40 +1000 Message-ID: <20150603140440.0cc405b5@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20150602160723.3b519d63@canb.auug.org.au> <20150603032750.GA49670@vmdeb7> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/mfxDPQL4cTIPTuQQcIQpVgR"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:33665 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750723AbbFCEEr (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2015 00:04:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20150603032750.GA49670@vmdeb7> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Darren Hart Cc: Philippe Coval , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dmitry Tunin --Sig_/mfxDPQL4cTIPTuQQcIQpVgR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Darren, On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 20:27:50 -0700 Darren Hart wrote: > > Thanks for the heads' up. This happens because my -next branch is based o= n *-rc1 > as I think was recommended at the last kernel summit. Since rc1 I sent Li= nus the > G50-30, but by rc6 I didn't feel good about sending the similar G50-30 fi= x, so > that is in my rc1 branch. >=20 > I am happy to rebase my -next on rc6 to avoid the conflict, but I believe= the > rebase is considered poor practice. This is a fairly trivial conflict and Linus will have no trouble fixing it up as well when he merges your tree in the next window > You said no action required, but if there is something I can do to avoid = this > kind of manual effort on your part (and a manual merge by Linus in the up= coming > merge window), I'm happy to update my process to accommodate. This is fine. git rerere remembers these conflict resolutions for me, so I only have to fix them once (usually). For a more complex conflict, you might consider merging the branch that you had Linus merge (or a later -rc) with, of course, a nice explanation in the merge commit message, but in this case that would be overkill. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au --Sig_/mfxDPQL4cTIPTuQQcIQpVgR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJVbnzdAAoJEMDTa8Ir7ZwVX4YP/R8vHXs9a7ZXSfySUYTmRG0Z Hr4Jhtuh45uUS07btgnfjdlizDchglL08o/wy7rQssOVb3JGCumAIRdYEpy9xEXd DROTuFRFqcf9x0kqw25wjVcl/g6PNSnv3ePVCHGCDA73cdsO+L5kh1dnT1jDNCo3 QoUNyrF70ADdSlxecClAYhWNnY5X62sfx/C+THX5G55ccN1qEYmY462ctAtrg6bZ NJKXnsF8nr13P44MVI3iq5WkJEW2pfifNC+u7NxamQFpyG3uLevus+Zup0WQlVWC zEBnYonghO0tvam6H5RePvylodt+tuMM6v65+vb1P2q/lIiqm3RJC1UfqJ1SPQYR NofoFBaLl4FOsRv35HjH9pOXFWFtqLzs7swYgVK6EyNJGd4bJaEYdrzRnk3EBNDe Lk44OOT2C0IbZ8eSzDGrSkH189FHazLoxKQ7Gp9MlXFNRKFVMFgRWJw2P3Ly9+Uu uBJCh592yKUJU2P+1HQFw/Apa5qKQZquMszHahR/2L2SvNK0xG9fvhEKpvavizUp QqufY3c7h/6YlWs7RyunOFizHFxL1/pthlI/Ewi+LCpfAtcy5hcXVDEXWKCJlwfg PfZt8GuJIPq9H007UeuI02Dp2yuBPiUiRQR8V6wngnFbB6jYMId+EnUbAfbABLJ7 4BZRF4LTzqRDqa5ipUNE =B7uB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/mfxDPQL4cTIPTuQQcIQpVgR--