From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Borntraeger Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm-arm tree Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:10:00 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170609142856.461a9d28@canb.auug.org.au> <20170628160204.0007fe06@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Jones , Claudio Imbrenda , Marcelo Tosatti , Gleb Natapov , KVM To: Stephen Rothwell , Cornelia Huck , Christoffer Dall , Marc Zyngier Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170628160204.0007fe06@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Language: en-IE Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 06/28/2017 08:02 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 14:28:56 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in: >> >> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >> >> between commit: >> >> 2387149eade2 ("KVM: improve arch vcpu request defining") >> >> from the kvm-arm tree and commit: >> >> 8611a6a64661 ("KVM: s390: CMMA tracking, ESSA emulation, migration mode") >> >> from the kvms390 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/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >> index 9c3bd94204ac,a8cafed79eb4..000000000000 >> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >> @@@ -42,9 -42,11 +42,11 @@@ >> #define KVM_HALT_POLL_NS_DEFAULT 80000 >> >> /* s390-specific vcpu->requests bit members */ >> -#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS 8 >> -#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS 9 >> -#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC 10 >> -#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION 11 >> -#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION 12 >> +#define KVM_REQ_ENABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(0) >> +#define KVM_REQ_DISABLE_IBS KVM_ARCH_REQ(1) >> +#define KVM_REQ_ICPT_OPEREXC KVM_ARCH_REQ(2) >> ++#define KVM_REQ_START_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(3) >> ++#define KVM_REQ_STOP_MIGRATION KVM_ARCH_REQ(4) >> >> #define SIGP_CTRL_C 0x80 >> #define SIGP_CTRL_SCN_MASK 0x3f > > With the merge window appraoching, I assume that these 2 trees will > merge in the kvm tree soon. This is just a reminder that this conflict > still exists (I think). Yes, these 2 trees will be merged in the kvm tree and Paolo/Radim will resolve the conflict.