From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the dma-mapping tree
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 13:49:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190222124946.GA29125@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ef80pjwy.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:43:41PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > cfced786969c ("dma-mapping: remove the default map_resource implementation")
> >
> > from the dma-mapping tree and commit:
> >
> > 68005b67d15a ("powerpc/dma: use the generic direct mapping bypass")
> >
> > from the powerpc tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I just used the latter) 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.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Christoph, I've put the powerpc dma changes in a topic branch if you
> want to merge it to reduce the conflicts. Up to you.
Thanks. I think the conflicts are pretty harmless as we are mostly
removing code entirely in the powerpc tree that the dma-mapping tree
touches.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the dma-mapping tree
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 13:49:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190222124946.GA29125@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ef80pjwy.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:43:41PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > cfced786969c ("dma-mapping: remove the default map_resource implementation")
> >
> > from the dma-mapping tree and commit:
> >
> > 68005b67d15a ("powerpc/dma: use the generic direct mapping bypass")
> >
> > from the powerpc tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I just used the latter) 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.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Christoph, I've put the powerpc dma changes in a topic branch if you
> want to merge it to reduce the conflicts. Up to you.
Thanks. I think the conflicts are pretty harmless as we are mostly
removing code entirely in the powerpc tree that the dma-mapping tree
touches.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-22 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-21 22:17 linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the dma-mapping tree Stephen Rothwell
2019-02-22 3:43 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-02-22 12:49 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-02-22 12:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-02-21 22:25 Stephen Rothwell
2019-02-21 22:27 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=20190222124946.GA29125@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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.