From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the livepatching tree with the powerpc tree Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:19 +1000 Message-ID: <1461030979.25103.4.camel@ellerman.id.au> References: <20160418142749.3a5910c6@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:52627 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751091AbcDSB4W (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:56:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160418142749.3a5910c6@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell , Jiri Kosina , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Axtens On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 14:27 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Jiri, > > Today's linux-next merge of the livepatching tree got a conflict in: > > arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > > between commit: > > 7f92bc569455 ("powerpc: sparse: Include headers for __weak symbols") > > from the powerpc tree and commit: > > 5d31a96e6c01 ("powerpc/livepatch: Add livepatch stack to struct thread_info") > > from the livepatching 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. This should go away tomorrow because then my next will have the topic branch merged. cheers