| Message ID | 20240712095825.6e1224d9@canb.auug.org.au (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-next: manual merge of the clk tree with the arm-soc tree | expand |
On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 09:58:25AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in: > > MAINTAINERS > > between commit: > > 480d9a6083f4 ("MAINTAINERS: thead: add git tree") > > from the arm-soc tree and commit: > > 1037885b309c ("dt-bindings: clock: Document T-Head TH1520 AP_SUBSYS controller") > > from the clk 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 44cff47c2594,04eb5587ffa7..000000000000 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@@ -19382,8 -19322,9 +19382,10 @@@ M: Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org > M: Fu Wei <wefu@redhat.com> > L: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > S: Maintained > +T: git https://github.com/pdp7/linux.git > + F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/thead,th1520-clk-ap.yaml > F: arch/riscv/boot/dts/thead/ > + F: include/dt-bindings/clock/thead,th1520-clk-ap.h > > RNBD BLOCK DRIVERS > M: Md. Haris Iqbal <haris.iqbal@ionos.com> Thank you for fixing this up. The resolution looks good to me. Drew
diff --cc MAINTAINERS index 44cff47c2594,04eb5587ffa7..000000000000 --- a/MAINTAINERS
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the clk tree got a conflict in: MAINTAINERS between commit: 480d9a6083f4 ("MAINTAINERS: thead: add git tree") from the arm-soc tree and commit: 1037885b309c ("dt-bindings: clock: Document T-Head TH1520 AP_SUBSYS controller") from the clk 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.