On 29/05/18 08:41, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Hi Stephen
>
> On 05/29/2018 07:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the irqchip tree got a conflict in:
>>
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>> 3c00436fdb20 ("ARM: dts: stm32: add USBPHYC support to stm32mp157c")
>>
>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>>
>> 5f0e9d2557d7 ("ARM: dts: stm32: Add exti support for stm32mp157c")
>>
>> from the irqchip tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>> complex conflicts.
>>
>
> Thanks for the fix (I will reorder nodes in a future patch). My opinion
> is that all STM32 DT patches should come through my STM32 tree. It is my
> role to fix this kind of conflicts. I thought it was a common rule
> (driver patches go to sub-system maintainer tree and DT to the Machine
> maintainer). For incoming next-series which contain DT+driver patches I
> will indicate clearly that I take DT patch. I'm right ?
Happy to oblige. Can you make sure you sync up with Ludovic and define
what you want to do?
In the meantime, I'm dropping the series altogether.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
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
