On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Em Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:36:58 +0200 > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > >> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab >> <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > This is an automatic generated email to let you know that the following patch were queued: >> > >> > Subject: [media] ARM: dts: exynos: add HDMI controller phandle to exynos4.dtsi >> > Author: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> >> > Date: Tue Dec 13 12:37:16 2016 -0200 >> > >> > Add the new hdmi phandle to exynos4.dtsi. This phandle is needed by the >> > s5p-cec driver to initialize the CEC notifier framework. >> > >> > Tested with my Odroid U3. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> >> > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > CC: linux-samsung-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > CC: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> > CC: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4.dtsi | 1 + >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> > >> >> Mauro, you should not apply it. It is already going through samsung-soc [1]. >> if you need this patch for bisectability or any other reasons, I >> provided a tag with it here: >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg171182.html >> >> Please drop the patch because now it will get duplicated. > > Having exactly the same patch applied on multiple trees usually is > not a problem, provided that it doesn't rise a non-trivial > conflict. > > I avoid rebase the tree where this patch is applied, as rebasing it > affect the workflow of other developers. > > I'm afraid that, if I revert this patch, it will cause more harm than > good. Of course, revert is wrong. The patch should be dropped with rebase, assuming that you accept the rebase itself. But if you do not rebase... then it has to stay. > So, I guess the best solution to fix the issue would be to pull from > a stable branch on your tree with has this patch and solve conflicts, > if any. This way, nothing will popup when merging upstream. This is why I provided it in separate tag, in first place! That is a proper solution for avoiding any patch duplication and conflicts. Indeed you are right that duplication of commits should not do any harm... but it is not a proper way of development, right? Anyway, it is up to you. I provided you a tag with it so you can merge it if needed (which would require rebasing). If not, then of course please do not revert it. Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
