From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with Linus' tree Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 14:45:12 +1100 Message-ID: <20180326144512.74706ad6@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20180322173722.78d012c5@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/y6xsWNGkUj0Qy.0ksgwbGCe"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180322173722.78d012c5@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Airlie , DRI Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org --Sig_/y6xsWNGkUj0Qy.0ksgwbGCe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:37:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got conflicts in several amdgpu > files because there are a set of (mostly identical) patches that appear > Linus' tree and the drm tree. In each case I just used the version fo > the file from the drm tree. >=20 > You should do a test merge between your tree and Linus' tree and see what > you want to do about the resolution (either do the back merge (I think > with v4.16-rc6), or provide Linus with branch that has the merge done). > Its a bit of a mess :-( I got a few more of these today. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/y6xsWNGkUj0Qy.0ksgwbGCe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAlq4bMgACgkQAVBC80lX 0GwQ8Af9H1GFH4QTihz/dTbHjqJPdgqiKTSmxJbfyS24jqwaflvJanDjc3Pdpj3D /WG+gzng9qn58tjSZU3yqsC+usPXEanwviU2nTGPQuOegEhVN88nOo9Wf7UANYtW GweXQJQigGqCPIvUQhehYXEWJ2J9VRM9jKQIdsb1ceHQzOorIK65iMZEaufSy4yB jhwY8gpZ0ASz74eUwP/ao6ZL7c/2GrOGv+Q8/XxK5auZn9v3cjTfDIi6MIJxpBt1 2eT+Au5IiaVcnQ4sM41wxqzsgT1N1b73WfVzu9U9gOd2F4OqqJkHasRTQlk96lzG EFv8tN5FSkx7/qapsYV7c9E19GNu2A== =376y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/y6xsWNGkUj0Qy.0ksgwbGCe--