Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751710AbdFINqu (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:46:50 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f170.google.com ([209.85.161.170]:36177 "EHLO mail-yw0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751596AbdFINqt (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170609135304.6c1108aa@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20170609135304.6c1108aa@canb.auug.org.au> From: Rob Herring Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 08:46:27 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the renesas tree To: Stephen Rothwell , Simon Horman Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Marcus Cooper , Biju Das Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 909 Lines: 27 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Today's linux-next merge of the devicetree tree got a conflict in: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt > > between commit: > > d795f15618b8 ("of: Add vendor prefix for iWave Systems Technologies Pvt. Ltd") > > from the renesas tree and commit: > > 97a0268e764c ("devicetree: add Itead vendor prefix") > > from the devicetree 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. Simon, I can pick up the conflicting patch if you want to drop it. Rob