On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 07:13:37PM +0530, Thomas Abraham wrote: > On 12 July 2012 18:32, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Well, simple conflicts aren't that big a deal... However, Thomas > > mentioned that in order to test this he merged the SPI tree into your > > tree so perhaps there is also a dependency on the SPI tree? If that was > > just for good practice testing then I agree that the best thing is to > > merge via your tree, otherwise we might need to think harder. > There were no dependency on Grant's spi/next branch. It was merged > just to ensure that nothing is broken. OK, great - then the Samsung tree it is.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
