linux-next: manual merge of the rtc tree with the arm-soc-fixes tree

Posted by Stephen Rothwell 3 years, 9 months ago

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the rtc tree got a conflict in:

  MAINTAINERS

between commit:

  2058dc831ff8 ("MAINTAINERS: add polarfire rng, pci and clock drivers")

from the arm-soc-fixes tree and commit:

  1bdb08c180e8 ("MAINTAINERS: add PolarFire SoC's RTC")

from the rtc 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 MAINTAINERS
index 2f618be2906f,69a960561e37..000000000000
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@@ -17443,13 -17141,9 +17443,14 @@@ M:	Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@micro
  L:	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
  S:	Supported
  F:	arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/
 +F:	drivers/char/hw_random/mpfs-rng.c
 +F:	drivers/clk/microchip/clk-mpfs.c
  F:	drivers/mailbox/mailbox-mpfs.c
 +F:	drivers/pci/controller/pcie-microchip-host.c
+ F:	drivers/rtc/rtc-mpfs.c
  F:	drivers/soc/microchip/
 +F:	drivers/spi/spi-microchip-core.c
 +F:	drivers/usb/musb/mpfs.c
  F:	include/soc/microchip/mpfs.h
  
  RNBD BLOCK DRIVERS

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rtc tree with the arm-soc-fixes tree

Posted by Conor.Dooley@microchip.com 3 years, 9 months ago

On 11/07/2022 09:14, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the rtc tree got a conflict in:
> 
>    MAINTAINERS
> 
> between commit:
> 
>    2058dc831ff8 ("MAINTAINERS: add polarfire rng, pci and clock drivers")
> 
> from the arm-soc-fixes tree and commit:
> 
>    1bdb08c180e8 ("MAINTAINERS: add PolarFire SoC's RTC")
> 
> from the rtc 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.

LGTM Stephen, thanks.