From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F11AC433E0 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:37:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B5D460295 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:37:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230256AbhBVKhI (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:37:08 -0500 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]:50196 "EHLO fllv0015.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230134AbhBVKg7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:36:59 -0500 Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 11MAZE4x020286; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 04:35:14 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1613990114; bh=1frvgHuwt9UE4V3scZaSJep38W1gkW3f9joP9vN7Sds=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=p+dl95Aa3fEp+HKrSCJKVXnxtQoc0/qmL28hLJXTB+0z20RrBDs0Q2du+1kD4vGxp rjuiMXKWk7Em3jSPZK36u3QQr/r8D3tU3Cc2ckDkQ0axdMOmlWohWV+wX2PTtQPBdK pugAG9QrapMhZoefDdWBRVhnYmku/Srff5X5xuHc= Received: from DFLE112.ent.ti.com (dfle112.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.33]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 11MAZEAo096611 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 04:35:14 -0600 Received: from DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) by DFLE112.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 04:35:13 -0600 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 04:35:13 -0600 Received: from [10.250.100.73] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 11MAZBj9122528; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 04:35:11 -0600 Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the net-next tree To: Stephen Rothwell , Rob Herring , David Miller , Networking CC: Jakub Kicinski , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Rob Herring References: <20210121132645.0a9edc15@canb.auug.org.au> <20210215075321.0f3ea0de@canb.auug.org.au> <20210222192306.400c6a50@canb.auug.org.au> From: Grygorii Strashko Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:35:10 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210222192306.400c6a50@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 22/02/2021 10:23, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 07:53:21 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:26:45 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the devicetree tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml >>> >>> between commit: >>> >>> 19d9a846d9fc ("dt-binding: net: ti: k3-am654-cpsw-nuss: update bindings for am64x cpsw3g") >>> >>> from the net-next tree and commit: >>> >>> 0499220d6dad ("dt-bindings: Add missing array size constraints") >>> >>> from the devicetree 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. >>> >>> diff --cc Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml >>> index 3fae9a5f0c6a,097c5cc6c853..000000000000 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml >>> @@@ -72,7 -66,8 +72,8 @@@ properties >>> dma-coherent: true >>> >>> clocks: >>> + maxItems: 1 >>> - description: CPSW2G NUSS functional clock >>> + description: CPSWxG NUSS functional clock >>> >>> clock-names: >>> items: >> >> With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this >> conflict still exists. > > This is now a conflict between the devicetree tree and Linus' tree. > Sorry for inconvenience, is there anything I can do to help resolve it? (Changes went through a different trees) -- Best regards, grygorii