Message ID | CAPDyKFrCuL9HmQyOPZXex1WZT0LiJ6HCj6JiXoh-x+o-CHuhiA@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Hi Ulf, On Thu, May 08 2014, Ulf Hansson wrote: > Note 2) > I have not included the patch below; since I think it would be better > if you just drop the patch which this is reverting from your mmc next > branch. > [PATCH 1/2] mmc: rtsx: Revert "mmc: rtsx: modify error handle and > remove smatch warnings" Thanks for putting this together, I've dropped that patch and pulled in your patchset to mmc-next now. Something I'm curious about -- if I drop the above rtsx patch from (what used to be) origin/mmc-next and then pull your branch, I get: From git://git.linaro.org/people/ulf.hansson/mmc * branch mmc-next_for_chris_3.16_take2 -> FETCH_HEAD Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/rtsx_usb_sdmmc.c CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in drivers/mmc/host/rtsx_usb_sdmmc.c Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/mxcmmc.c CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in drivers/mmc/host/mxcmmc.c Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/Makefile Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. The conflict in rtsx_usb_sdmmc.c is understandable, but I wonder why mxcmmc.c grew a conflict when it wasn't modified by the patch I dropped? If you happen to know, would be great to understand it. :) Thanks! - Chris.
On 13 May 2014 00:23, Chris Ball <chris@printf.net> wrote: > Hi Ulf, > > On Thu, May 08 2014, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> Note 2) >> I have not included the patch below; since I think it would be better >> if you just drop the patch which this is reverting from your mmc next >> branch. >> [PATCH 1/2] mmc: rtsx: Revert "mmc: rtsx: modify error handle and >> remove smatch warnings" > > Thanks for putting this together, I've dropped that patch and pulled > in your patchset to mmc-next now. > > Something I'm curious about -- if I drop the above rtsx patch from > (what used to be) origin/mmc-next and then pull your branch, I get: > > From git://git.linaro.org/people/ulf.hansson/mmc > * branch mmc-next_for_chris_3.16_take2 -> FETCH_HEAD > Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/rtsx_usb_sdmmc.c > CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in drivers/mmc/host/rtsx_usb_sdmmc.c > Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/mxcmmc.c > CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in drivers/mmc/host/mxcmmc.c > Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/Makefile > Auto-merging drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig > Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. > > The conflict in rtsx_usb_sdmmc.c is understandable, but I wonder why > mxcmmc.c grew a conflict when it wasn't modified by the patch I > dropped? If you happen to know, would be great to understand it. :) > Huh, it seems like you re-based your branch while removing the rtsx patch patch, but before pulling my branch. And since my branch were based on yours, we screwed up. :-) I tried doing the same operation locally, but I really can't tell what happens. I would strongly suggest you to go back to the previous state were the you still hold the rtsx patch on your branch and start over. Then do things in the opposite order. If you don't have access to your old version of your mmc-next branch, you could just overwrite your mmc-next branch with the mmc-next_for_chris_3.16_take2 branch from my git tree. Kind regards Uffe > Thanks! > > - Chris. > -- > Chris Ball <http://printf.net/> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html