From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757004Ab2GER45 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2012 13:56:57 -0400 Received: from smtprelay-b12.telenor.se ([62.127.194.21]:55603 "EHLO smtprelay-b12.telenor.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752814Ab2GER4z (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2012 13:56:55 -0400 X-SENDER-IP: [85.230.168.62] X-LISTENER: [smtp.bredband.net] X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AilUAMrU9U9V5qg+PGdsb2JhbABFihqtFRkBAQEBHgMWDSeCGAEBBTocIxAIAxguFCUKGhOID7lfFIslhV5gA5U2hWaMfw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,532,1336341600"; d="scan'208";a="372100225" From: "Henrik Rydberg" Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 19:57:23 +0200 To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Daniel Kurtz , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the input-mt tree with the input-current tree Message-ID: <20120705175723.GA3286@polaris.bitmath.org> References: <20120705135220.9f8f95082833a0d6fadeb136@canb.auug.org.au> <20120705171904.GA31383@core.coreip.homeip.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120705171904.GA31383@core.coreip.homeip.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 10:19:05AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Henrik, > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:57:14AM +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi Henrik, > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the input-mt tree got a conflict in > > > drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c between commit 9b7e31bbf4bb > > > ("Input: request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT") from the > > > input-current tree and commit c2ef9a1a248b ("Input: atmel_mxt_ts - use > > > client name for irq") from the input-mt tree. > > > > > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. > > > > Looks good to me. Don't know if you need it for a merge, but: > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Kurtz > > > > Hmm, maybe it is time I pull your tree? By all means, I have nothing further planned for the merge window. I wanted to wait until Linus pulls your current tree, then pull in the merge conflict, then eventual reverts, then send you a pull request. IOW, something like tomorrow. Sounds good? Henrik