linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/mtk-wdt.txt between commit: 275e85971b7d ("ARM: mediatek: dts: Cleanup bindings documentation") from the arm-soc tree and commit: e8a7fc711c9a ("dt-bindings: watchdog:

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/mtk-wdt.txt between commit: 275e85971b7d ("ARM: mediatek: dts: Cleanup bindings documentation") from the arm-soc tree and commit: e8a7fc711c9a ("dt-bindings: watchdog:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 08/03/16 16:03, Fu Wei wrote: Hi All, On 8 March 2016 at 22:52, André Przywara wrote: [...] I can rebase this patch to make a watchdog DT patch for foundation-v8.dtsi ASAP. Thanks If this is too much hassle I could also send a fix after -rc1 (as the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 08/03/16 16:03, Fu Wei wrote: Hi All, On 8 March 2016 at 22:52, André Przywara wrote: [...] I can rebase this patch to make a watchdog DT patch for foundation-v8.dtsi ASAP. Thanks If this is too much hassle I could also send a fix after -rc1 (as the breakage is not really

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 08/03/16 23:06, Sudeep Holla wrote: Hi Sudeep, > On 08/03/16 15:52, André Przywara wrote: >> On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi Wim, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: >>> >>>arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts >>> >>> between

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 08/03/16 23:06, Sudeep Holla wrote: Hi Sudeep, > On 08/03/16 15:52, André Przywara wrote: >> On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi Wim, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: >>> >>>arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts >>> >>> between

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Andre, On 08/03/16 15:52, André Przywara wrote: On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts between commit: d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split Foundation model dts to

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Andre, On 08/03/16 15:52, André Przywara wrote: On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts between commit: d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split Foundation model dts to

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi All, On 8 March 2016 at 22:52, André Przywara wrote: > On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi Wim, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: >> >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts >> >> between commit: >> >>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi All, On 8 March 2016 at 22:52, André Przywara wrote: > On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi Wim, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: >> >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts >> >> between commit: >> >> d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Wim, > > Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts > > between commit: > > d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split Foundation model dts to put the GIC > separately") > > from the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 07/03/16 11:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Wim, > > Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts > > between commit: > > d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split Foundation model dts to put the GIC > separately") > > from the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 07/03/16 19:00, Olof Johansson wrote: On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: Hi Olof, On 07/03/16 05:41, Olof Johansson wrote: Hi Wim, It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On 07/03/16 19:00, Olof Johansson wrote: On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: Hi Olof, On 07/03/16 05:41, Olof Johansson wrote: Hi Wim, It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Olof, > > On 07/03/16 05:41, Olof Johansson wrote: >> >> Hi Wim, >> >> It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc >> trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you >>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Olof, > > On 07/03/16 05:41, Olof Johansson wrote: >> >> Hi Wim, >> >> It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc >> trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you >> can easily drop it and

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote: > Hi All, > >> It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc >> trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you >> can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote: > Hi All, > >> It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc >> trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you >> can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable >>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi All, > It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc > trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you > can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable > branch? > > > -Olof I can always redo the tree once you picked it

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi All, > It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc > trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you > can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable > branch? > > > -Olof I can always redo the tree once you picked it

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Olof, On 07/03/16 05:41, Olof Johansson wrote: Hi Wim, It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable branch? Sorry for

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Olof, On 07/03/16 05:41, Olof Johansson wrote: Hi Wim, It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable branch? Sorry for

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable branch? -Olof On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, It's much easier for us if all DTS changes go in through the arm-soc trees, to avoid these kind of conflicts. Is this on a branch where you can easily drop it and we pick it up instead, or is it on a now-stable branch? -Olof On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts between commit: d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split Foundation model dts to put the GIC separately") from the arm-soc tree and commit: fe3a97e8ed02 ("ARM64: add SBSA Generic

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts between commit: d11a89796678 ("arm64: dts: split Foundation model dts to put the GIC separately") from the arm-soc tree and commit: fe3a97e8ed02 ("ARM64: add SBSA Generic

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in drivers/watchdog/Kconfig between commit 59416745bb8c ("watchdog: orion: Enable the build on ARCH_MVEBU") from the arm-soc tree and commit db5dd336cb23 ("watchdog: orion: prepare new Dove DT Kconfig variable") from the

linux-next: manual merge of the watchdog tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi Wim, Today's linux-next merge of the watchdog tree got a conflict in drivers/watchdog/Kconfig between commit 59416745bb8c (watchdog: orion: Enable the build on ARCH_MVEBU) from the arm-soc tree and commit db5dd336cb23 (watchdog: orion: prepare new Dove DT Kconfig variable) from the watchdog