Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-156871-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <9baaed82-c118-4a60-beff-2be9dbe2a6c3@foss.st.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:28:21 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the
 net-next, stm32 trees
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "Paolo
 Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
        "Arnd
 Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
CC: Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Gatien Chevallier
	<gatien.chevallier@foss.st.com>,
        "Kory Maincent (Dent Project)"
	<kory.maincent@bootlin.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List
	<linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
References: <20240424134038.28532f2f@canb.auug.org.au>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240424134038.28532f2f@canb.auug.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Stephen

On 4/24/24 05:40, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the devicetree tree got a conflict in:
> 
>    drivers/of/property.c
> 
> between commits:
> 
>    6a15368c1c6d ("of: property: fw_devlink: Add support for "access-controller"")
>    93c0d8c0ac30 ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for pse parent")
> 
> from the net-next, stm32 trees and commit:
> 
>    669430b183fc ("of: property: fw_devlink: Add support for "power-supplies" binding")
> 
> 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.
> 

After remark from Saravana I just updated the stm32-next branch which 
impact part of code mentioned above. I think you should get a merge 
conflict on the next stm32-next merge into linux-next.

I will warn Arnd B. about those conflicts in my next PR.

regards
Alex