From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark McLoughlin Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net tree with the tree Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:24:37 +0000 Message-ID: <1237537477.4938.60.camel@blaa> References: <20090320113242.bfe7fe62.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <1295ed070903192138y23ef0a67mf0e38d96cad54dc0@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: Mark McLoughlin Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:41401 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753549AbZCTIY6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 04:24:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1295ed070903192138y23ef0a67mf0e38d96cad54dc0@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Pantelis Koukousoulas Cc: Stephen Rothwell , David Miller , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell Hi Pantelis, On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 06:38 +0200, Pantelis Koukousoulas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi David, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the net tree got a conflict in > > drivers/net/virtio_net.c between commit > > 4783256ef92f5aecd6d54693b16386f2a0021c2a ("virtio_net: Make virtio_net > > support carrier detection") from the net-current tree and commit > > 9f4d26d0f3016cf8813977d624751b94465fa317 ("virtio_net: add link status > > handling") from the net tree. > > > > I think that the latter patch means that the former is not needed, so I > > used the version from the net tree. > > -- > > Cheers, > > Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au > > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ > > > > Hi, > > The correct merge is so that the conflicting part becomes like this: > > + /* If we have no carrier info, the answer is "always on". */ > vi->status = VIRTIO_NET_S_LINK_UP; > + netif_carrier_on(vi->dev); > > I.e., you need to keep this netif_carrier_on(vi->dev) to maintain > useful behavior > for current/older versions of qemu that don't support link handling (because > in this case VIRTIO_NET_S_LINK_UP will not cause netif_carrier_on to > be called). (Sorry, I missed the original discussion while on vacation) The merge resolution looks fine ... although netif_carrier_on() isn't really needed (it's the default) and, also, it's unusual to add a comment in a merge resolution. Probably best for davem to merge net-2.6 into net-next-2.6 in order to sort it out. Cheers, Mark.