2019-03-04 03:38:14

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the watchdog tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drivers-x86 tree got a conflict in:

include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h

between commit:

9f03161a1bd8 ("platform_data/mlxreg: additions for Mellanox watchdog driver.")

from the watchdog tree and commit:

9b28aa1d0eae ("platform_data/mlxreg: Document fixes for core platform data")

from the drivers-x86 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 include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h
index 31f7c25a44da,1b2f86f96743..000000000000
--- a/include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h
+++ b/include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h
@@@ -120,12 -109,9 +122,12 @@@ struct mlxreg_core_item
/**
* struct mlxreg_core_platform_data - platform data:
*
- * @led_data: led private data;
+ * @data: instance private data;
* @regmap: register map of parent device;
- * @counter: number of led instances;
+ * @counter: number of instances;
+ * @features: supported features of device;
+ * @version: implementation version;
+ * @identity: device identity name;
*/
struct mlxreg_core_platform_data {
struct mlxreg_core_data *data;


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

2019-03-07 05:27:47

by Darren Hart

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the watchdog tree

On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 02:37:35PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drivers-x86 tree got a conflict in:
>
> include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 9f03161a1bd8 ("platform_data/mlxreg: additions for Mellanox watchdog driver.")
>
> from the watchdog tree and commit:
>
> 9b28aa1d0eae ("platform_data/mlxreg: Document fixes for core platform data")
>
> from the drivers-x86 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 Stephen.

I suspect this will be a rare occurence. That said - Vadim - could you please
ensure that all the mellanox driver changes Cc the platform driver x86 mailing
list by adding it to MAINTAINERS?

--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center

2019-03-07 05:42:51

by Darren Hart

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the watchdog tree

On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 09:27:01PM -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 02:37:35PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the drivers-x86 tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 9f03161a1bd8 ("platform_data/mlxreg: additions for Mellanox watchdog driver.")
> >
> > from the watchdog tree and commit:
> >
> > 9b28aa1d0eae ("platform_data/mlxreg: Document fixes for core platform data")
> >
> > from the drivers-x86 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 Stephen.
>
> I suspect this will be a rare occurence. That said - Vadim - could you please
> ensure that all the mellanox driver changes Cc the platform driver x86 mailing
> list by adding it to MAINTAINERS?

And, turns out, not so rare. We've been down this road before. I'll just prepare
the patch for the MAINTAINERS.

--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center