ARM/ARM-SoC plans for v3.4 merge window

[Olof Johansson]

Hi,

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre at atmel.com> wrote:
> On 01/29/2012 12:57 AM, Olof Johansson :
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> And we're now there.  So...
>>>
>>> Arnd, Olaf,
>>>
>>> Please incorporate the latest ARM (for-armsoc branch) changes, which can be found at:
>>>
>>>        git://ftp.arm.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/arm/kernel/git-cur/linux-arm.git for-armsoc
>>>
>>> with SHA1 dcf81c1af839b77b44404453ecae6e5ac5a75f05.
>>
>> Thanks. I have added this as depends/rmk/for-armsoc in the arm-soc repo.
>>
>> Any next/ branch we start will have this as the base of said branch,
>> so any vendor branches must either already be developed against this
>> stable branch, or merge on top of this with minimal conflicts.
>
> Ok, great.
>
> I just let you know that there is a conflict between the current Linus'
> tree (with recently updated at91 fixes) and this rmk/for-armsoc branch.
>
> I can give you the resolution of this conflict easily but I would like
> to know which way I execute the merge:
>
> I use this rmk/for-armsoc as a baseline and merge the fixes already in
> Linus' tree on top of it or the other way around?
>
> Maybe it is preferable that I wait for 3.3-rc2 and merge rmk/for-armsoc
> on top of it. This result can be the base of our AT91 work for 3.4
> preparation.
>
> Your thought?

I missed replying to this email until now when I started looking at
picking up branches for the 3.4 staging, sorry for the delay.

Russell, would you prefer merging in v3.3-rc2 into your branch so I
can pull the exact same resolution from there, or should we do it
locally in arm-soc? It probably makes sense for you to do it so
there's no more conflicts from there on out for dependent branches.


-Olof