On Thu 17 Jun 11:34 CDT 2021, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 02:43:46PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got conflicts in:
> >
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor-r0.dts
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor-r1.dts
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 39441f73d91a ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: lazor: Simplify disabling of charger thermal zone")
> >
> > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> >
> > 1da8116eb0c5 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180-trogdor: Add nodes for onboard USB hub")
> >
> > from the usb 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 Stephen for fixing this up for -next!
>
> One option would be to revert 1da8116eb0c5 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180-trogdor:
> Add nodes for onboard USB hub") from usb-next and land it through the qcom/arm-soc
> tree with the rest of the SC7180 device tree patches.
>
> Greg/Bjorn, does the above sound like a suitable solution to you or do you
> think it would be better to deal with the conflict in a different way?
Having the dts patch go through the Qualcomm tree instead would resolve
the issue.
I wasn't aware that the driver code had landed yet, so I haven't merged
the DT patch, but can do so and include it in the pull request that I'm
preparing for 5.14.
Greg, does that sound reasonable to you?
Regards,
Bjorn
