On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 09:05:06AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the openrisc tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/soc/litex/litex_soc_ctrl.c
>
> between commit:
>
> e6dc077b7dff ("soc: litex: Fix compile warning when device tree is not configured")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 3706f9f76a4f ("drivers/soc/litex: Add restart handler")
>
> from the openrisc 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.
Hi Stephen,
Thank's I knew about this conflict but I was not sure the best way to handle, I
was/am going to rebase the openrisc/for-next branch onto 5.11-rc5 once released.
I will resolve the conflict during the rebase so you should be able to drop the
conflict patch after that.
The issue is I had a fix that went straight to 5.11. Should I usually put these
kind of fixes on my for-next and my fixes branches in parallel, that way I can
resolve conflicts on for-next before hand?
I don't usually do that as in my mind for next is for 5.12 and fixes for 5.11 go
straight to 5.11. Also, I don't like putting the same patch in 2 queues. But
if I got any advice on how to avoid this in the future it would be appreciated.
Thank you,
-Stafford
