On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 02:23:42PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:21:07 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the iio tree got a conflict in: > > > > drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 54d394905c92 ("iio: adc: ti-ads1119: fix sample size in scan struct for triggered buffer") > > > > from the char-misc.current tree and commit: > > > > 2cfb4cd058d0 ("iio: adc: Use aligned_s64 instead of open coding alignment.") > > > > from the iio 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. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Stephen Rothwell > > > > diff --cc drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c > > index c268e27eec12,0a68ecdea4e6..000000000000 > > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c > > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c > > @@@ -500,8 -500,8 +500,8 @@@ static irqreturn_t ads1119_trigger_hand > > struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev; > > struct ads1119_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev); > > struct { > > - unsigned int sample; > > + s16 sample; > > - s64 timestamp __aligned(8); > > + aligned_s64 timestamp; > > } scan; > > unsigned int index; > > int ret; > > This is now a conflict between the char-misc tree and Linus' tree. > Thanks, now resolved in my tree. greg k-h