From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 938237DA62; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 22:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738101809; cv=none; b=MXDUhK40EorA0g4XyZHW2RHfwVxfEC4HWkAvDrAtSYSV5px9fLSrVRsJMHjjb8vr+LwNbpb2yM4A43SYHC/cD0fUQbpAd66DwPfoOL1DMcJm3oQBR0/IdhaYx6c07px+gMUrFYpuSJh/uQ3+mL38H0xxP82UWbXT8b0ByyUf6sc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738101809; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PJgp0lSdevMc1knIjUz75nQexXRPcNE7gf/emh38NUg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ucenEIBgYbkE+3bk8YNXolZJqGt7o6p54I3vvwYeIxV3xW02Lq3LyhyPh3ygj6p7OEzPFB4V43jtAHISimsK+634q7lv2K/7qGgn6zcNkeCbt18vdRlE7Co43gRGOpSdXslguebBATuy2BJXf5Q6HxCLRghTCw9MTaDTMnsdlcY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=hnFJ+1n/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="hnFJ+1n/" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 02068403FA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1738101801; bh=pObLU3/odRsJRCQYcGtZUuqUMwEUOI04VzNwVrx1guk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=hnFJ+1n/vIeFPrMA6MT8Mmd/oUgaD7lZhvdJg5jV2ie8RK1eCr3RinhGmuyowYWRP /wOl3h3YWZ8T/ryAG9dq0v5jB5V1sD833s5xmm0k/UTD4KmqCPpFae1U3orLPpIYyg kukfpuUhriZug3ZAzrHRvjZWbWR7vLMfyNrhF51IQjLvflXeKl252nhVrKSlbf7bXn OY4T+4XKA2NiO3hctBvB98tjfPwLK12TAQbiHZL+ac2Dny9MfLcvbiFXfoLTkv79Y3 IoZGQyPch8T0Kmjx9uFDsVFp8DbhGCH7sVylkEHVv66uAdWpRrqzEKP82bH6YX8T+l UTwS7aBhTuLsQ== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:625::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 02068403FA; Tue, 28 Jan 2025 22:03:20 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Bagas Sanjaya , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Sakari Ailus Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree with the jc_docs tree In-Reply-To: <20250128114901.17b5b765@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20250123120728.5fb6e1b4@canb.auug.org.au> <20250128114901.17b5b765@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 15:03:20 -0700 Message-ID: <87y0yu7g0n.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi all, > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 12:07:28 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in: >> >> Documentation/admin-guide/media/ipu3.rst >> >> between commit: >> >> 3961fba7e1e9 ("media: ipu3.rst: Prune unreferenced footnotes") >> >> from the jc_docs tree and commit: >> >> 688c0a6907a7 ("media: Documentation: ipu3: Remove unused and obsolete references") >> >> from the v4l-dvb tree. >> >> I fixed it up (I just used the former - it added one more line) 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. > > This is now a conflict between the jc_docs tree and Linus' tree. I'll just drop the offending patch on this side - its objective has been achieved. Thanks, jon