2022-10-18 22:37:19

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the mtd tree with the mtd-fixes tree

Hi all,

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

drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c

between commit:

12b58961de0b ("mtd: core: add missing of_node_get() in dynamic partitions code")

from the mtd-fixes tree and commit:

63db0cb35e1c ("mtd: core: simplify (a bit) code find partition-matching dynamic OF node")

from the mtd tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the latter version) 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


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

2022-10-19 06:56:55

by Rafał Miłecki

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mtd tree with the mtd-fixes tree

Hi,

On 2022-10-19 00:28, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the mtd tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 12b58961de0b ("mtd: core: add missing of_node_get() in dynamic
> partitions code")
>
> from the mtd-fixes tree and commit:
>
> 63db0cb35e1c ("mtd: core: simplify (a bit) code find
> partition-matching dynamic OF node")
>
> from the mtd tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the latter version) 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.

this isn't exactly the correct fix, of_node_get() is still needed.

I'll make sure we let Linus know about this conflict (and solution) when
sending 6.2 pull request.


diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
index 07249af4f890..20fcedc3021e 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
@@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ static void mtd_check_of_node(struct mtd_info *mtd)
if (!mtd_is_partition(mtd))
return;

- parent_dn = mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent);
+ parent_dn = of_node_get(mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent));
if (!parent_dn)
return;

2022-10-19 07:18:27

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mtd tree with the mtd-fixes tree

Hi Rafał,

On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 07:31:57 +0200 Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> this isn't exactly the correct fix, of_node_get() is still needed.
>
> I'll make sure we let Linus know about this conflict (and solution) when
> sending 6.2 pull request.
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> index 07249af4f890..20fcedc3021e 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ static void mtd_check_of_node(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> if (!mtd_is_partition(mtd))
> return;
>
> - parent_dn = mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent);
> + parent_dn = of_node_get(mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent));
> if (!parent_dn)
> return;
>


Thanks for checking. I have added that to my resolution for tomorrow
onward.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell


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

2022-10-19 15:07:23

by Miquel Raynal

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mtd tree with the mtd-fixes tree

Hi,

[email protected] wrote on Wed, 19 Oct 2022 18:08:07 +1100:

> Hi Rafał,
>
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 07:31:57 +0200 Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > this isn't exactly the correct fix, of_node_get() is still needed.
> >
> > I'll make sure we let Linus know about this conflict (and solution) when
> > sending 6.2 pull request.
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> > index 07249af4f890..20fcedc3021e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> > @@ -559,7 +559,7 @@ static void mtd_check_of_node(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > if (!mtd_is_partition(mtd))
> > return;
> >
> > - parent_dn = mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent);
> > + parent_dn = of_node_get(mtd_get_of_node(mtd->parent));
> > if (!parent_dn)
> > return;
> >
>
>
> Thanks for checking. I have added that to my resolution for tomorrow
> onward.

Thanks Rafał for the right resolution and Stephen for carrying the fix.
I'll send the fixes PR soon and rebase on top of an -rc containing it
to avoid this conflict resolution to be needed when sending the final
PR to Linus during the next MW.

Thanks,
Miquèl

2022-10-19 21:54:28

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mtd tree with the mtd-fixes tree

Hi Miquel,

On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 15:49:07 +0200 Miquel Raynal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Rafał for the right resolution and Stephen for carrying the fix.
> I'll send the fixes PR soon and rebase on top of an -rc containing it
> to avoid this conflict resolution to be needed when sending the final
> PR to Linus during the next MW.

Why not just merge your mtd/fixes branch into your mtd/branch (rather
than rebasing)?

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell


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

2022-10-20 08:31:30

by Miquel Raynal

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mtd tree with the mtd-fixes tree

Hi Stephen,

[email protected] wrote on Thu, 20 Oct 2022 01:06:47 +1100:

> Hi Miquel,
>
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 15:49:07 +0200 Miquel Raynal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Rafał for the right resolution and Stephen for carrying the fix.
> > I'll send the fixes PR soon and rebase on top of an -rc containing it
> > to avoid this conflict resolution to be needed when sending the final
> > PR to Linus during the next MW.
>
> Why not just merge your mtd/fixes branch into your mtd/branch (rather
> than rebasing)?
>

Yes, actually I usually wait for the next -rc and merge Linus' tag.

Thanks,
Miquèl