lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the arm-soc tree
    On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02 PM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
    <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
    > On 4/21/17 2:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
    >>
    >> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:39 AM, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com
    >> <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> On 4/20/17 10:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Hi all,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> include/dt-bindings/genpd/k2g.h
    >>>>>
    >>>>> between commit:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 7cc119f29b19 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
    >>>>>
    >>>>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 45da8edd1741 ("dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains")
    >>>>>
    >>>>> from the pm tree.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I fixed it up (I just used the pm tree 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.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Dave, Santosh,
    >>>>
    >>>> any idea what happened here? It seems that we picked up the wrong
    >>>> version of the tree, do we need to drop this from arm-soc?
    >>>>
    >>> Nope. Its because this series was in my 'next' branch for a week or
    >>> so and now it made it via arm-soc tree next as well.
    >>>
    >>> I just cleaned up my next head so it linux-next next tag should have
    >>> only arm-soc copy.
    >>
    >>
    >> I still see two conflicting trees in linux-next as of today, neither of
    >> them is your keystone tree:
    >>
    > In the list it was agreed that the patchset goes via arm-soc tree.
    >
    > ae3874c ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
    > 52835d5 soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
    > 7cc119f dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
    > 213ec7f PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle cells
    > a5ea7a0 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
    >
    >> arm-soc/next/drivers:
    >> ae3874cc931b ARM: keystone: Drop PM domain support for k2g
    >> 52835d59fc6c soc: ti: Add ti_sci_pm_domains driver
    >> 7cc119f29b19 dt-bindings: Add TI SCI PM Domains
    >> 213ec7fed302 PM / Domains: Do not check if simple providers have phandle
    >> cells
    >> a5ea7a0fcbd7 PM / Domains: Add generic data pointer to genpd data struct
    >>
    > Above are the correct git object for which I sent pull request for.

    Ok, good, thanks for checking! They are however the commits that
    contain the silly https://urldefense.proofpoint.com URLs. Can you
    send a follow-up patch to fix these and use the regular http://www.ti.org
    URL that is in linux-next?

    Arnd

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2017-04-21 23:44    [W:2.509 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site