On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2011 7:43 PM, "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Grant,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the 52xx-and-virtex tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/video/sm501fb.c between commit e6a049807105 ("video, sm501: add
>> edid and commandline support") from Linus' tree and commit b6c19191c13e
>> ("video/sm501: add edid and commandline support") from the
>> 52xx-and-virtex tree.
>>
>> These are slightly different versions of the same patch. I used the
>> version from the 52xx-and-virtex tree (that removed a use of
>> __devinitdata).
>>
>> Also, another between commit 4295f9bf74a8 ("video, sm501: add OF binding
>> to support SM501") from Linus' tree and commit 9d83d245a352
>> ("video/sm501: add OF binding to support SM501") from the 52xx-and-virtex
>> tree.
>>
>> Again, different versions of the same patch. The former has a whole hunk
>> that appears to fix a memory leak. So I used that.
>
> Okay, I'll probably drop those patches from my tree then... I'll investigate
> tomorrow.
Ah, I missed that Paul had picked them up. Dropping from my tree.
g.
--
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
