From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:59:49 +1000 Message-ID: <20170807145949.4c4f4dc6@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20170807120113.5e51eec0@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neal Cardwell Cc: David Miller , Networking , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Yuchung Cheng List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org Hi Neal, On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 22:21:43 -0400 Neal Cardwell wrote: > > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating > > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly > > complex conflicts. > > Sorry about that. Will try to follow that procedure in the future. The above is a generic statement I add to all these emails. It is aimed more at the maintainers if the trees involved, no the developers of patches. I don't think you need to do anything different in these cases with the "net" and "net-next" tree. Dave Miller will fix up any conflicts when he next merges the net tree into the net-next tree. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell