From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B9E0C10F0E for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:25:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282452084C for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:25:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="A2R6SpqH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727536AbfDINZg (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:25:36 -0400 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]:36560 "EHLO fllv0015.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727110AbfDINZg (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:25:36 -0400 Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x39DPOKU061509; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 08:25:24 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1554816324; bh=ElKsdCRAaFtyjy1zns63JULeahO75mzwOEbFIiHQ54E=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=A2R6SpqH1o/y4WIvM8ixXRfzVgaHDYf15X8KbS9yNBJtGww0zcZ2XhrBSXbPmyKWC EQTYTsFNMv/P41gkcClU0ojnNuDDehuBseWSAtwiaY7Ub8ICEsQcLzqpUbRjczcbeq JL6euvlA3iwOlOnCWsdBjKqI3nkXrP677FXiOx2M= Received: from DLEE103.ent.ti.com (dlee103.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.33]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x39DPOxM021212 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 9 Apr 2019 08:25:24 -0500 Received: from DLEE100.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.30) by DLEE103.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 08:25:24 -0500 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DLEE100.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 08:25:24 -0500 Received: from [172.24.191.45] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x39DPLKG013036; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 08:25:22 -0500 Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rtc tree with the omap tree To: Stephen Rothwell , Alexandre Belloni , Tony Lindgren CC: Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <20190409152226.5fecccd1@canb.auug.org.au> From: Keerthy Message-ID: <1e3bc22e-97b5-3f63-c202-e04cfad48222@ti.com> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 18:55:51 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190409152226.5fecccd1@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/04/19 10:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the rtc tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/rtc/rtc-omap.c > > between commit: > > 6256f7f7f217 ("rtc: OMAP: Add support for rtc-only mode") > > from the omap tree and commit: > > 35118b7a4ea0 ("rtc: omap: let the core handle range") > > from the rtc tree. > > I fixed it up (I used the latter resolution around tm2bcd() changes) 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. Thanks Stephen. I have tested with Latest next and rtc+ddr mode is functional with an additional fix that Tony is about to queue. I also reviewed the rtc driver and looks fine. >