On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 11:35 AM Bartosz Golaszewski
<bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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?
Yups go ahead, it's totally immutable!
Sorry for not thinking about it before.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
