Stephen, On 06/21/2013 02:36 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 June 2013, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> I wonder if this mess is caused by the fact that I did the revert >>> instead of rebuilding our for-next and dropping the merge in the first >>> place. >>> >>> I'll rebuild our for-next (or maybe Arnd will beat me to it) before >>> next linux-next build, i.e. Sunday night my time. >> >> Could be, especially if some of the commits are the same in the reverted >> branch and newly merged branch as git might think that some merges have >> been already resolved the right way earlier. Yes, please drop the particular mailbox branch that you were picking into linux-next. It was the previous framework which was dropped at the last minute during the 3.10 merge window in favor of new one still under its final development steps, so we will not be using any commits from that branch. Sorry for the trouble on this one. The branch that Arnd took has some of the OMAP patches reworked in preparation for the newer one. > > I already rebuilt the arm-soc tree before Stephen started with today's > linux-next, so I think the conflict is elsewhere. > > It's probably best if Suman Anna rebases the mailbox tree on top of > the omap mailbox branch that I took. > I will rebase the mailbox tree once we have the new patches from Jassi finalized. regards Suman -- 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
