| Message ID | 20191216101250.227b4bd6@canb.auug.org.au |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree | expand |
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 10:12:50AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/net/phy/phylink.c > > between commit: > > 9b2079c046a9 ("net: phylink: fix interface passed to mac_link_up") > > from the net tree and commit: > > 24cf0e693bb5 ("net: phylink: split link_an_mode configured and current settings") > > from the net-next 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. > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell > > diff --cc drivers/net/phy/phylink.c > index 1585eebb73fe,1e0e32c466ee..000000000000 > --- a/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c > @@@ -441,8 -445,9 +445,8 @@@ static void phylink_mac_link_up(struct > struct net_device *ndev = pl->netdev; > > pl->cur_interface = link_state.interface; > - pl->ops->mac_link_up(pl->config, pl->link_an_mode, > + pl->ops->mac_link_up(pl->config, pl->cur_link_an_mode, > - pl->phy_state.interface, > - pl->phydev); > + pl->cur_interface, pl->phydev); > > if (ndev) > netif_carrier_on(ndev); Yep, that's correct. Thanks.
diff --cc drivers/net/phy/phylink.c index 1585eebb73fe,1e0e32c466ee..000000000000 --- a/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: drivers/net/phy/phylink.c between commit: 9b2079c046a9 ("net: phylink: fix interface passed to mac_link_up") from the net tree and commit: 24cf0e693bb5 ("net: phylink: split link_an_mode configured and current settings") from the net-next 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.