Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kbuild tree with Linus' tree

[Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:32:24 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Michal,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kbuild tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/Kconfig
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   0f60a8efe400 ("mm: Implement stack frame object validation")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commits:
> 
>   a5967db9af51 ("kbuild: allow architectures to use thin archives instead of ld -r")
>   b67067f1176d ("kbuild: allow archs to select link dead code/data elimination")
> 
> from the kbuild 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.
> 

Thanks Stephen, this should be a trivial conflict. Also you wrote one
of the patches :)

Question, what is the best way to merge dependent patches? Considering
they will need a good amount of architecture testing, I think they will
have to go via arch trees. But it also does not make sense to merge these
kbuild changes upstream first, without having tested them.

Thanks,
Nick