Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iio tree with the char-misc.current tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:23:42 +1100

Hi all,

On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:21:07 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the iio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   54d394905c92 ("iio: adc: ti-ads1119: fix sample size in scan struct for triggered buffer")
> 
> from the char-misc.current tree and commit:
> 
>   2cfb4cd058d0 ("iio: adc: Use aligned_s64 instead of open coding alignment.")
> 
> from the iio 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.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c
> index c268e27eec12,0a68ecdea4e6..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti-ads1119.c
> @@@ -500,8 -500,8 +500,8 @@@ static irqreturn_t ads1119_trigger_hand
>   	struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev;
>   	struct ads1119_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>   	struct {
>  -		unsigned int sample;
>  +		s16 sample;
> - 		s64 timestamp __aligned(8);
> + 		aligned_s64 timestamp;
>   	} scan;
>   	unsigned int index;
>   	int ret;

This is now a conflict between the char-misc tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell