From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the staging tree Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:49:21 +0200 Message-ID: <20170828064921.GA24696@kroah.com> References: <20170828164127.15902025@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:49513 "EHLO out2-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750837AbdH1GtR (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2017 02:49:17 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170828164127.15902025@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: James Bottomley , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Hannes Reinecke , "Martin K. Petersen" , Sameer Wadgaonkar On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 04:41:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi James, > > Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/staging/unisys/visorhba/visorhba_main.c > > between commits: > > 781facd05eb9 ("staging: unisys: visorhba: visorhba_main.c: fixed comment formatting issues") > > from the staging tree and commit: > > 7bc4e528d9f6 ("scsi: visorhba: sanitze private device data allocation") > > from the scsi tree. > > 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. Ick, messy merge, thanks for doing this. greg k-h