Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754120Ab3H1IGy (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 04:06:54 -0400 Received: from multi.imgtec.com ([194.200.65.239]:61525 "EHLO multi.imgtec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752299Ab3H1IGu (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 04:06:50 -0400 Message-ID: <521DAF3C.9030201@imgtec.com> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:05:16 +0100 From: James Hogan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Rothwell CC: Mike Turquette , =?UTF-8?B?U8O2cmVuIEJyaW5rbWFu?= =?UTF-8?B?bg==?= , , , Michal Simek Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with Linus' tree References: <20130827190304.c3f2f891f20d078d66b703b1@canb.auug.org.au> <521C7AF0.1020903@imgtec.com> <20f57100-4440-4353-9c84-6e5781f7c6d3@DB9EHSMHS025.ehs.local> <20130827165319.8231.9@quantum> <20130828100431.3005d52d77c565c241399269@canb.auug.org.au> <20130828172225.97f295645c9de0bbd2979fcd@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20130828172225.97f295645c9de0bbd2979fcd@canb.auug.org.au> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kiWfljf2Nm0IqQG0XnVofrBhOpnf1OR7H" X-Originating-IP: [192.168.154.65] X-SEF-Processed: 7_3_0_01192__2013_08_28_09_06_45 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4422 Lines: 122 --kiWfljf2Nm0IqQG0XnVofrBhOpnf1OR7H Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Stephen On 28/08/13 08:22, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:04:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 09:53:19 -0700 Mike Turquette wrote: >>> > > >>> > > Quoting S=C3=B6ren Brinkmann (2013-08-27 08:44:11) >>>> > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:09:52AM +0100, James Hogan wrote: >>>>> > > > > On 27/08/13 10:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>>> > > > > > Hi Mike, >>>>>> > > > > >=20 >>>>>> > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict = in >>>>>> > > > > > drivers/clk/zynq/clkc.c between commits 252957cc3a2d ("c= lk/zynq/clkc: Add >>>>>> > > > > > dedicated spinlock for the SWDT") and 765b7d4c4cb3 >>>>>> > > > > > ("clk/zynq/clkc: Add CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT flag to etherne= t muxes") from >>>>>> > > > > > Linus' tree and commit 819c1de344c5 ("clk: add CLK_SET_R= ATE_NO_REPARENT >>>>>> > > > > > flag") from the clk tree. >>>>>> > > > > >=20 >>>>>> > > > > > I fixed it up (see below and in a couple of places I cho= se >>>>>> > > > > > CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT, which= may, of course, >>>>>> > > > > > be wrong) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action = is required). >>>>> > > > >=20 >>>>> > > > > The case you mentioned looks correct to me. >>>>> > > > >=20 >>>>> > > > > I can't see todays -next yet, but if by "choose CLK_SET_RAT= E_NO_REPARENT >>>>> > > > > over CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT" you mean one branch adds CLK_SET_= RATE_PARENT, >>>>> > > > > clk-next adds CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, and the resolution = ends up with >>>>> > > > > only CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT then that sounds wrong, as the= two flags >>>>> > > > > are orthogonal. >>>> > > >=20 >>>> > > > I can just agree, the case included in the mail looks correct,= but in >>>> > > > case of other conflicts both flags should be set. Just like in= the case >>>> > > > shown here. >>> > >=20 >>> > > Stephen's fix is correct. The Zynq patches came in as fixes so I = think >>> > > this will be a rare event. >> >=20 >> > Can you guys discuss this and come up with a single answer. I read = the above as: >> >=20 >> > (for the two places I used CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT where the two >> > branches each added that and CLK_SET_RATE_NOREPARENT respectively) >> >=20 >> > "Stephen was wrong" >> > "Stephen should have taken both" >> > "Stephen was right" >> >=20 >> > :-) :-) I think the 3 way diff omitting hunks where once branch's changes are discarded might have confused us, even though you mentioned that there were other conflicts (I only twigged why I couldn't see them after seeing your new resolution). >> >=20 >> > I can fix up my merge resolution if you tell me the correct fix. Al= so, >> > you will need to know so that you can tell Linus (or whoever else ha= s to >> > resolve these conflicts). > OK, I thought about it some more and the resolution now looks like > below. Is this correct/better? It looks correct to me now. Thanks James --kiWfljf2Nm0IqQG0XnVofrBhOpnf1OR7H Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) iQIbBAEBAgAGBQJSHa9CAAoJEKHZs+irPybfZMIP+OYlM1bc2XWXTohjN6EG76Kq 59JfzMVdiTa2Mcf834TaWlcTMBb1JEbMe3v6THvKZoM25ugkkQymxfkeu9DClrCE oXLd01FuPTS01VaSnRrumPUKSSQZVi1eoGi5zTc20Hd+fDHdc/ZuIpLHedqW19Du qqBxItlobYstR7iag/gLVhqG1LJUF4/b/tTaUo5zzIpHV06lM0svqWGJOF6LZjXP R2p+Arw6s1x8aZ5QGQq3/qXV9EyZmBAHVUOH1Vv4l21ZJOWB9kf2BVZ+zqLHhnRu e6RR8ajfVMOfnmYbHzgJJ7/EcPaM5YAIVp23z1Ak39I6wdf0LboaMSTlDKkq2Qyj FVOslYj2DLB29qYSlpZCVQ+gp008WMZTSW5ntvllPjt6AMsQvRqh+Jgf3oIxzHte +xK1PypqmX+ZUNxRL8IOOnuSMZdMaOG62t2fapXxMo51tDmuFFlGPMDNjItIWfSN fLKpw/smUtGgEs18xTYp/yniFjx6JFfc3LC5/3Y4ilGmvdBj1E1jhkm5KgaSxpzJ 9+XDe3BeaR7r+VoDtimzQJ1X9eCRDOuTBaJm5/hQ+vWwOMf/HADhqy5XIj9gC1vk lK7zfp9H60FXKMZtvsT6+I1KRWRn8XXFyc8j3BYYbzl9kDd6BZL2cEYOkfHyKysV PR9cf3wVcsviHQRqniM= =Rdd2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kiWfljf2Nm0IqQG0XnVofrBhOpnf1OR7H-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/