Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the driver-core tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 10:31:51 +1100

Hi Catalin,

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:32:51 +0000 Catalin Marinas <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 11:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the driver-core tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/mtd/maps/integrator-flash.c between commit
> > ffc86cf850dcd0e181a69c6fa0217d6c7ddf9c85 ("Add armflash support for
> > multiple blocks of flash") from the arm tree and commit
> > 0b1ea7e6450b3cc2e87d1c7295439483d007bb6e ("mtd: struct device - replace
> > bus_id with dev_name(), dev_set_name()") from the driver-core tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (see below).  
> 
> I'll send a separate patch on linux-mtd to make the third argument of
> mtd_concat_create a "const char *" to avoid a warning (dev_name returns
> const char *).

That would be good.

> > Maybe you, Russell and David Woodhouse could
> > sort out who should coordinate these updates.
> 
> I dropped the patch from my series and I suspect Russell will re-merge
> my tree (there shouldn't be other conflicts via the arm tree).
> 
> Now the question, where should I send the changes to integrator-flash.c
> to? I assume it's linux-mtd with ack from Russell.

I would guess that makes sense.

> Anyway, no matter who'll merge it, as long as it is based on the
> mainline kernel it will create a conflict in linux-next. Is the rule
> that there shouldn't be any conflicts in linux-next at this stage? The
> alternative is to get it merged via the driver-core tree.

There will always be conflicts between trees in linux-next.  My concern
is to try to minimise them if possible.  I can carry fixes to the merges
I do without to much pain and presumably Linus can cope with anything I
can.  Conflicts against Linus' tree should be fixed as soon as makes
sense, but some conflicts between the other constituent trees of
linux-next can only be resolved during the next merge window.

(I usually put "and I can carry the fix as necessary" in my messages, but
I missed that in this case, sorry).
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    [email-masked]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/