linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with Linus' tree

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Wim,

Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/watchdog/mpc8xxx_wdt.c

between commit:

  e99e88a9d2b0 ("treewide: setup_timer() -> timer_setup()")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  fbdec655375c ("watchdog: mpc8xxx: use the core worker function")

from the watchdog tree.

I fixed it up (I used the latter which removed the setup_timer call) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 836 bytes --]

Hi Wim,

Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in
drivers/rtc/rtc-stmp3xxx.c between commit c8a6046e1e0b ("drivers/rtc: use
of_match_ptr() macro") from Linus' tree and commit e02f5cf6b648 ("rtc:
stmp3xxx: add wdt-accessor function") from the watchdog tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc drivers/rtc/rtc-stmp3xxx.c
index b2a8ed9,cc9a9b6..0000000
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-stmp3xxx.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-stmp3xxx.c
@@@ -26,7 -26,8 +26,9 @@@
  #include <linux/rtc.h>
  #include <linux/slab.h>
  #include <linux/of_device.h>
 +#include <linux/of.h>
+ #include <linux/stmp_device.h>
+ #include <linux/stmp3xxx_rtc_wdt.h>
  
  #include <mach/common.h>
  

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 257 bytes --]

Hi Wim,

On Wed, 26 May 2010 08:35:34 +0200 Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be> wrote:
>
> I will clean up the watchdog-next tree.

OK, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with Linus' tree

[Wim Van Sebroeck]

Hi Stephen,

> These are two versions of the same patch.  I used the version from Linus'
> tree - but I do need to ask what is the point of having a patch in
> linux-next for two days and then submitting a different version of the
> patch to Linus?  The changes are not insignificant. Both patches have the
> same Author date and SOB etc lines.

The one that went to Linus is the correct one.
I must apologise, I indeed fucked things up. I wasn't completely happy
with Wolfram's patch, changed it, Wolfram pointed out some things that
still could be improved and then we tested the final version, saw that
everything was OK and much beter then what we had.
And then I made the error to want to rush it in during this merge window
still (due to the fact that we are allready reviewing this driver for a
long time). So yes sorry, this was the wrong thing to do (well, not having
a better driver in, but the way the testing should have been done and the
correct process that should have been followed).

I will clean up the watchdog-next tree.

Sorry again,
Wim.

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 865 bytes --]

Hi Wim,

Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in
drivers/watchdog/imx2_wdt.c between commit
bb2fd8a844d3a9209599b5fb694b30ac46a56ef0 ("watchdog: Driver for the
watchdog timer on Freescale IMX2 (and later) processors") from Linus'
tree and commit 1216b28847276929d920296e34b4e8226eaf4e79 ("watchdog:
Driver for the watchdog timer on Freescale IMX2 (and later) processors")
from the watchdog tree.

These are two versions of the same patch.  I used the version from Linus'
tree - but I do need to ask what is the point of having a patch in
linux-next for two days and then submitting a different version of the
patch to Linus?  The changes are not insignificant. Both patches have the
same Author date and SOB etc lines.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]