Re: linux-next: manual merge of the workqueues tree with the Linus'tree
From: Stephen Rothwell
Date: Wed Aug 04 2010 - 23:46:05 EST
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 13:04:59 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 21:42:33 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:34:55 +0200 Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > I was thinking about sending pull request w/ a note describing how to
> > > resolve the conflict. Would pulling in master before requesting pull
> > > be better?
> > Either would work. Linus is fine with doing merge fixups and, after all,
> > I figured it out. :-)
> > A description always helps, of course.
> Linus has merged the cifs tree, so you could fix these conflicts in your
> tree by merging the cifs tree that Linus' merged (rather than merging
> against all of Linus' tree). That would be commit
> cb76d5e25008b76fb8e348c861d32659430ac3fa ("cifs: fsc should not default
> to "on"") in Linus' tree.
> Or you could leave it all to Linus if you want to.
Actually there is some more stuff in the cifs tree that has not gone to
Linus, yet. Sorry about that.
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Description: PGP signature