From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with Linus' tree Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:29:00 +0100 Message-ID: <20180724092859.GE19324@arm.com> References: <20180724085015.029efd54@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180724085015.029efd54@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Catalin Marinas , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Olof Johansson , Paul Kocialkowski , Laura Abbott , Greg Hackmann , Masahiro Yamada List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org Hi Stephen, On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 08:50:15AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in: > > arch/arm64/Makefile > > between commits: > > 38fc42486775 ("arm64: Use aarch64elf and aarch64elfb emulation mode variants") > 2893af07e507 ("arm64: add endianness option to LDFLAGS instead of LD") > 96f95a17c1cf ("Revert "arm64: Use aarch64elf and aarch64elfb emulation mode variants"") > > from Linus' tree and commit: > > c931d34ea085 ("arm64: build with baremetal linker target instead of Linux when available") > > from the arm64 tree. > > I fixed it up (I just used the latter version) 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. Thanks; that is the correct resolution. Will