Hi, On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:24:44 -0500 Suman Anna <s-a...@ti.com> wrote: > > On 06/21/2013 02:36 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Friday 21 June 2013, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>> I wonder if this mess is caused by the fact that I did the revert > >>> instead of rebuilding our for-next and dropping the merge in the first > >>> place. > >>> > >>> I'll rebuild our for-next (or maybe Arnd will beat me to it) before > >>> next linux-next build, i.e. Sunday night my time. > >> > >> Could be, especially if some of the commits are the same in the reverted > >> branch and newly merged branch as git might think that some merges have > >> been already resolved the right way earlier. > > Yes, please drop the particular mailbox branch that you were picking > into linux-next. It was the previous framework which was dropped at the > last minute during the 3.10 merge window in favor of new one still under > its final development steps, so we will not be using any commits from > that branch. Sorry for the trouble on this one. The branch that Arnd > took has some of the OMAP patches reworked in preparation for the > newer one.
OK, I have removed the mailbox tree for now. Let me know if you want it to be back in again. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
pgpjBq3YbKVi0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
