[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the irqchip tree with the arm-soc tree
On 29/05/18 08:41, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Hi Stephen
> On 05/29/2018 07:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Today's linux-next merge of the irqchip tree got a conflict in:
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
>> between commit:
>> 3c00436fdb20 ("ARM: dts: stm32: add USBPHYC support to stm32mp157c")
>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>> 5f0e9d2557d7 ("ARM: dts: stm32: Add exti support for stm32mp157c")
>> from the irqchip 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.
> Thanks for the fix (I will reorder nodes in a future patch). My opinion
> is that all STM32 DT patches should come through my STM32 tree. It is my
> role to fix this kind of conflicts. I thought it was a common rule
> (driver patches go to sub-system maintainer tree and DT to the Machine
> maintainer). For incoming next-series which contain DT+driver patches I
> will indicate clearly that I take DT patch. I'm right ?
Happy to oblige. Can you make sure you sync up with Ludovic and define
what you want to do?

In the meantime, I'm dropping the series altogether.


Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-29 09:48    [W:0.057 / U:3.560 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site