On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 17:52 +0100, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxx> [100208 01:23]:
> > On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 07:25 +0100, ext Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Tomi,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the omap_dss2 tree got a conflict in
> > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-am3517evm.c between commit
> > > 13560d875d67c06239c82a6148c1b87075701fe9 ("AM3517: Enable basic I2C
> > > Support") from the omap tree and commit
> > > 56a3d0235cd50d14d7bd4d45e55d192aa0e78cac ("OMAP: AM3517: Enable DSS2 for
> > > AM3517EVM board") from the omap_dss2 tree.
> > >
> > > Juts overlapping additions. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the
> > > fix as necessary.
> >
> > Thanks. I guess we can't properly fix this until the patch from omap
> > tree goes into mainline.
>
> Let's move the AM3517 DSS2 board patch from Tomi's tree to omap for-next
> tree.
>
> > Tony, do you think this current way, in which we have board file changes
> > in both linux-omap and the dss tree, is best we can do? Or should all
> > the board file changes go through linux-omap? I fear that we will have
> > conflicts with every new board.
>
> Yeah we should just move the conflicting files into omap for-next. The board
> file changes conflict easily when new platform device init code is being
> added.
>
> Tomi, how about you ack and let me know about the patches (or git branch)
> you want me to add into omap for-next? Otherwise I'll assume anything
> DSS2 related is yours.
This sounds good. However, we need to be careful that there are no
dependencies from the board file patches to the DSS patches (like panel
drivers).
But this is getting out of topic for this mail thread, let's deal with
this separately =).
Tomi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
