Hi Geert,
On 11/09/2011 05:13 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Greg,
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 08:08, Greg Ungerer<gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/09/2011 10:15 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
arch/m68k/Kconfig between commit d890d7399525 ("m68k/irq: Remove obsolete
m68k irq framework") from the m68k tree and commit 4e8a9e70dfe8 ("m68k:
selection of GENERIC_ATOMIC64 is not MMU specific") from the m68knommu
tree.
Just context changes. áI fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
necessary.
Thanks. Both this and the previous m68k merge conflict patch look good.
Geert: would you prefer I hold off on these 2 patches until after
you merge your IRQ changes?
I'll ask Linus to pull them today or tomorrow. After that (and he has
pulled), you can
rebase your tree. Is that OK for you?
Yep, that is good. I wasn't sure if you where looking to push them
in rc1 or in the next merge window.
Thanks
Greg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx
SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888
8 Gardner Close, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630
Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
--
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
