Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 17 Jun 2021 09:34:21 -0700
From:   Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the arm-soc tree
Message-ID: <YMt5jTLYv+DKWKdn@google.com>
References: <20210617144346.564be887@canb.auug.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210617144346.564be887@canb.auug.org.au>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 02:43:46PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got conflicts in:
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor-r0.dts
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor-r1.dts
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   39441f73d91a ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: lazor: Simplify disabling of charger thermal zone")
> 
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> 
>   1da8116eb0c5 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180-trogdor: Add nodes for onboard USB hub")
> 
> from the usb 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 for fixing this up for -next!

One option would be to revert 1da8116eb0c5 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180-trogdor:
Add nodes for onboard USB hub") from usb-next and land it through the qcom/arm-soc
tree with the rest of the SC7180 device tree patches.

Greg/Bjorn, does the above sound like a suitable solution to you or do you
think it would be better to deal with the conflict in a different way?