Messages in this thread | | | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> | Date | Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:17:16 +0200 | Subject | Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree |
| |
Hi Stephen,
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:42 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > [forgot the conflict resolution ...] > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:27:20 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in: > > > > arch/m68k/mac/misc.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 5b9bfb8ec467 ("m68k: mac: Use time64_t in RTC handling") > > > > from the m68k tree and commit: > > > > ebd722275f9c ("macintosh/via-pmu: Replace via-pmu68k driver with via-pmu driver") > > > > from the powerpc tree. > > > > I fixed it up (see below) 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.
Ah, now I remember Finn said he was going to rebase his series once the time64_t patch has entered my tree...
> --- a/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c > +++ b/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c > @@@ -90,11 -85,11 +90,11 @@@ static void cuda_write_pram(int offset > } > #endif /* CONFIG_ADB_CUDA */ > > - #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU68K > + #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU > -static long pmu_read_time(void) > +static time64_t pmu_read_time(void) > { > struct adb_request req; > - long time; > + time64_t time; > > if (pmu_request(&req, NULL, 1, PMU_READ_RTC) < 0) > return 0;
Thanks, looks good to me!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
| |