From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753446Ab3EIKCP (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2013 06:02:15 -0400 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:45520 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752698Ab3EIKCO (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2013 06:02:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 11:01:49 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Srinivas Kandagatla , Dimitris Papastamos Message-ID: <20130509100149.GD7478@sirena.org.uk> References: <20130509115659.fed19d305e0b180697060f95@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="YTqNa7If1bmePjLb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130509115659.fed19d305e0b180697060f95@canb.auug.org.au> X-Cookie: You have no real enemies. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.42.102.178 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the regmap tree with Linus' tree X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --YTqNa7If1bmePjLb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 11:56:59AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Today's linux-next merge of the regmap tree got a conflict in > drivers/base/regmap/regmap-debugfs.c between commit 480738de0e07 > ("regmap: debugfs: Simplify calculation of `c->max_reg'") from Linus' > tree and commit 5e3f5901ac6c ("regmap: debugfs: Fix start_reg > calculation") from the regmap tree. > I am not sure that the latter patch is ever required on top of the > former, so for now I just used the former version (except for the last > hunk) (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is > required). > Please let me know if this is the incorrect resolution. Looks sensible. I'll resolve everything on top of -rc1 once that's released but I think that's the solution. --YTqNa7If1bmePjLb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRi3QKAAoJELSic+t+oim9sMMQAJyrh9BTsercEfioDhhbMmqf +E20qzo36QBUeUa1fgiDD8a6D3xbk2qSJHtAMd7rtcAXfRnVyjcl51faQWJuFy5Z C8bP39Gz9zBlc/KhnbjHz11jEKZnLIh/ZxqBgVof1c0szERUg9ZE7Sx6wLrW+xyK J4U7k7uBJqbIbxFaJoyNFkYLML2hO5q5FT/3dhCMYCpLY93TYJza0UgL4+AT7Y6H LSMCpvbBSNlk4PSFvzaEXbhYL5TyCvazpIs1Cc749tjANXFybWjsUp7xGIeAgmTu J80l8Qv2vBep45EIJukko93LpPFj+UndRKOdcKi1QOf35d5ePahRjJJvoVxjKQeG /ZUWQqr3qbaaO2+W1IBOhVYVN3gHCyQkyCYuAGCwpqP+JzufHYd7GL2VMJsWLdwi YM7/1vq7HIM/3mi7KSKY88hVYaxob9HvAXGlazXfu2sgAvqt5QFCv0pMwgNH63+F wXhEfE8tdqDTlSGFQwv8LXzQS003aZMG2GJ5XxzJCx970E1glY6iI9AV/bV+d7zB UMl7h1GpXk+o4q0ADUNFs9EfX0/WhCqQoNFsvt0N4/guoQuRh/CFegfop7KqzNJF vKgK/1XZySXDZcvCGkDybcMb5+AA944/sZEf5NaR2OaL2JmWmfqZHcfKEoJzfXv4 KWjn5ACZ3WwA8VVJ6DKT =S4lo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --YTqNa7If1bmePjLb--