On 04/05/2013 03:32 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 05 April 2013, Michal Simek wrote:
Interesting. I rebased my arm-next branch based on 3.9-rc5
with some Rob's + one Arnd patch from arm-soc - clksrc/cleanup branch.
I will fix my arm-next branch.
The for-next branch in arm-soc is not stable, you should never base
anything on it. If you depend on some stable branch, that is in arm-soc,
then use just that branch, not one of the next/* branches or for-next.
I haven't based on arm-soc for-next branch my arm-next branch.
I just took all patches I need for zynq and done git rebase v3.5-rc5.
Which caused that I have became commuter of that 4 patches
and there is probably any conflict between your for-next branch and
clksrc/cleanup
which you have resolved in for-next branch.
Ah, I see. That was actually my fault, I'm sorry for causing trouble
here and then accusing you instead.
And because of my rebase sha1 are different that's why Stephen
had problem with it.
I have changed my arm-next branch and will see on Monday if Stephen
will report any problem or not.
Ok, thanks!
No worries.
Thanks,
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian
--
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
