Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 11:05 AM > To: David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Networking <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx>; Arnd > Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>; ARM <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux > Next Mailing List <linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; iwamatsu nobuhiro(岩松 信洋 □ＳＷＣ◯ＡＣＴ) > <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm-soc tree > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got conflicts in: > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/toshiba/tmpv7708-rm-mbrc.dts > arch/arm64/boot/dts/toshiba/tmpv7708.dtsi > > between commits: > > 4fd18fc38757 ("arm64: dts: visconti: Add watchdog support for TMPV7708 SoC") > 0109a17564fc ("arm: dts: visconti: Add DT support for Toshiba Visconti5 GPIO driver") > > from the arm-soc tree and commit: > > ec8a42e73432 ("arm: dts: visconti: Add DT support for Toshiba Visconti5 ethernet controller") > > from the net-next 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. > This is because the DTS changes are included in net-next. This patch should be merged via the soc tree. I had the same problem before. How is it correct to send a DTS patch? Should I separate into different series? Best regards, Nobuhiro
