On Thursday, March 15, 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 15 March 2012, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > The following patch (5d7220ec000f rebased on top of 1740d3448012) shows the > > correct conflict resolution in my opinion. > > > > From f040ba69632a54c86767974768d68b308901061c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:37:19 +0900 > > Subject: [PATCH] ARM: mach-shmobile: sh7372 map_io and init_early update > > > > ARM: mach-shmobile: sh7372 map_io and init_early update > > > > Update the sh7372 SoC and the AP4EVB and Mackerel boards to make use > > of the functions sh7372_map_io() and sh7372_add_early_devices(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Hi Laurent, > > I've merged Paul's branch into my renesas/soc branch, because I don't > rebase the branches once they are merged into arm-soc. Thanks a lot > for the resolution you suggested, I used the same resulting code > in the merge commit. > > I'm not particularly happy about how we got here. Obviously, the bug > fixes that Paul sent should have gone through the arm-soc tree to > avoid this situation, and they should have been based on a -rc release > rather than some random commit after -rc6. It's not a big issue > because the next/soc branch already contains -rc7 though. This is a consequece of our decision that Paul would handle v3.3 fixes and push them directly to Linus, while I would take new material for v3.4, sorry about that. It should be a temporary problem only, though, because once v3.3 has been released, all arm/mach-shmobile fixes will go through the arm-soc tree. Thanks, Rafael -- 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
