On Tue, 30 May 2023 at 11:29, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2023, at 06:19, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the gpio-brgl tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-twl4030.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > d5f4fa60d63a ("ARM/gpio: Push OMAP2 quirk down into TWL4030 driver")
> >
> > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> >
> > fbc8ab2ccd85 ("gpio: twl4030: Use devm_gpiochip_add_data() to
> > simplify remove path")
> >
> > from the gpio-brgl 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.
>
> Maybe Bartosz wants to merge Linus' gpio-omap-descriptors-v6.5 series
> into the gpio/for-next branch as well? It touches both the
> arch/arm/mach-omap and a lot of the drivers using the gpios, so we
> could treat this as a shared immutable branch.
>
> Arnd
I was about to ask for an immutable tag. :)
Linus, is this the right tag to pull from your tree?
Bart
