2019-02-08 02:39:32

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mfd tree got a conflict in:

drivers/mfd/Kconfig

between commit:

9baddb61dfec ("mfd: Fix unmet dependency warning for MFD_TPS68470")

from Linus' tree and commit:

09fdc9857712 ("mfd: Kconfig: Fix I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM dependencies")

from the mfd 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/mfd/Kconfig
index 76f9909cf396,f38f8741c68e..000000000000
--- a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
@@@ -1419,10 -1419,10 +1419,10 @@@ config MFD_TPS6521

config MFD_TPS68470
bool "TI TPS68470 Power Management / LED chips"
- depends on ACPI && I2C=y
+ depends on ACPI && PCI && I2C=y
+ depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y
select MFD_CORE
select REGMAP_I2C
- select I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
help
If you say yes here you get support for the TPS68470 series of
Power Management / LED chips.


Attachments:
(No filename) (499.00 B)
OpenPGP digital signature

2019-02-08 08:34:06

by Jarkko Nikula

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with Linus' tree

On 2/8/19 4:37 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mfd tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/mfd/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 9baddb61dfec ("mfd: Fix unmet dependency warning for MFD_TPS68470")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 09fdc9857712 ("mfd: Kconfig: Fix I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM dependencies")
>
> from the mfd 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.
>
Thanks, that's is the right fix for the conflict.

--
Jarkko