2015-02-03 05:31:50

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Mike,

Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/mach-omap2/cclock3xxx_data.c between commit ca662ee7b8a8
("ARM: OMAP2+: Remove unused ti81xx platform init code") from the
arm-soc tree and commit d6540b193719 ("ARM: OMAP3: remove legacy clock
data") from the clk tree.

I fixed it up (the latter removed the file, so I did that) and can
carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]


Attachments:
(No filename) (819.00 B)
OpenPGP digital signature

2015-02-03 18:25:13

by Mike Turquette

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with the arm-soc tree

Quoting Stephen Rothwell (2015-02-02 21:31:40)
> Hi Mike,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/cclock3xxx_data.c between commit ca662ee7b8a8
> ("ARM: OMAP2+: Remove unused ti81xx platform init code") from the
> arm-soc tree and commit d6540b193719 ("ARM: OMAP3: remove legacy clock
> data") from the clk tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter removed the file, so I did that) and can
> carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).

That is the correct fix.

Thanks,
Mike

>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]

2016-03-01 08:38:23

by Nicolas Ferre

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with the arm-soc tree

Le 01/03/2016 05:00, Stephen Rothwell a ?crit :
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:57:00 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in:
>>
>> drivers/clk/at91/clk-main.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>> 99a81706526f ("clk: at91: remove IRQ handling and use polling")
>>
>> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>>
>> 8c1b1e54faed ("clk: at91: Remove impossible checks for of_clk_get_parent_count()")
>>
>> from the clk tree.
>
> And the same for drivers/clk/at91/clk-master.c

Stephen,

Both fixes seem good. Thanks!

Bye,
--
Nicolas Ferre