From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the cisco tree with the vfs tree
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 14:54:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190114225412.GD18707@fifo99.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190115093330.1cbb0625@canb.auug.org.au>
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 09:33:30AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 16:29:23 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the cisco tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > dcf8001d292b ("vfs: Suppress MS_* flag defs within the kernel unless explicitly enabled")
> >
> > from the vfs tree and commit:
> >
> > 2c070709ea75 ("This updates the x86 code to use the CONFIG_GENERIC_CMDLINE")
> >
> > from the cisco 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 arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > index e493202bf265,ee109f490b22..000000000000
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > @@@ -51,7 -51,7 +51,8 @@@
> > #include <linux/kvm_para.h>
> > #include <linux/dma-contiguous.h>
> > #include <xen/xen.h>
> > +#include <uapi/linux/mount.h>
> > + #include <linux/cmdline.h>
> >
> > #include <linux/errno.h>
> > #include <linux/kernel.h>
>
> This is now a conflict between the cicso tree and Linus' tree.
I did a rebase after your original made this. I'm not sure it's needed any
longer. However, I was planning to rebase my tree again on top of the latest
Linus tree. How would you like to proceed ?
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-14 22:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-02 6:29 linux-next: manual merge of the cisco tree with the vfs tree Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-14 22:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-14 22:54 ` Daniel Walker [this message]
2019-01-15 0:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190114225412.GD18707@fifo99.com \
--to=dwalker@fifo99.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.