Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751130AbdFBEDs (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2017 00:03:48 -0400 Received: from mail.linux-iscsi.org ([67.23.28.174]:52310 "EHLO linux-iscsi.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750710AbdFBEDr (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2017 00:03:47 -0400 Message-ID: <1496376224.27407.228.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> Subject: Re: linux-next: upcoming conflict between the target-updates and target-bva trees From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Bart Van Assche , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 21:03:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170602133928.2afa3e7a@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20170602133928.2afa3e7a@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 774 Lines: 21 On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 13:39 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Last night the tagret-bva tree was rebased on top of the target-updates > tree. Just now, part of the target-updates tree has been rewritten. > So now I expect to get conflict(s) when I merge these trees since the > commits in the target-updates tree are no longer the same as those that > the target-bva tree was rebased on top of. > > Please take a little time to sort out your development process. > Unfortunately, this is going to continue to be a problem once these patches are list reviewed, and included in target-updates. Bart, can you please drop the patches until they are list reviewed so there isn't a constant stream of merge conflicts in linux-next for your un-reviewed code..?