* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree
@ 2017-08-31 1:07 Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-01 13:20 ` Jean Delvare
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-08-31 1:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Jean Delvare
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Christoph Hellwig, Toshi Kani
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
between commit:
f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
from the dmi tree and commit:
5aa5911a0ed9 ("ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()")
from the pm 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree
2017-08-31 1:07 linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-09-01 13:20 ` Jean Delvare
2017-09-04 6:37 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2017-09-01 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Christoph Hellwig, Toshi Kani
Hi Stephen,
On jeu., 2017-08-31 at 11:07 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
>
> between commit:
>
> f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
>
> from the dmi tree and commit:
>
> 5aa5911a0ed9 ("ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()")
>
> from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
Below, where?
> 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.
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree
2017-09-01 13:20 ` Jean Delvare
@ 2017-09-04 6:37 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-04 23:17 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-09-04 6:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Delvare
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Linux-Next Mailing List,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Hellwig, Toshi Kani
Hi Jean,
On Fri, 01 Sep 2017 15:20:21 +0200 Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On jeu., 2017-08-31 at 11:07 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
> >
> > from the dmi tree and commit:
> >
> > 5aa5911a0ed9 ("ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()")
> >
> > from the pm tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>
> Below, where?
Oops sorry, I think this is it:
d75dc5255183bfae1181f5e1e8b260f18794d79d
diff --cc drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
index f58bbc368f88,037fd537bbf6..995c4d8922b1
--- a/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
@@@ -30,24 -30,7 +30,7 @@@
#include "internal.h"
- enum acpi_blacklist_predicates {
- all_versions,
- less_than_or_equal,
- equal,
- greater_than_or_equal,
- };
-
- struct acpi_blacklist_item {
- char oem_id[7];
- char oem_table_id[9];
- u32 oem_revision;
- char *table;
- enum acpi_blacklist_predicates oem_revision_predicate;
- char *reason;
- u32 is_critical_error;
- };
-
-static struct dmi_system_id acpi_rev_dmi_table[] __initdata;
+static const struct dmi_system_id acpi_rev_dmi_table[] __initconst;
/*
* POLICY: If *anything* doesn't work, put it on the blacklist.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* RE: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree
2017-09-04 6:37 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-09-04 23:17 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kani, Toshimitsu @ 2017-09-04 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Jean Delvare
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Linux-Next Mailing List,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Hellwig
> Hi Jean,
>
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2017 15:20:21 +0200 Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > On jeu., 2017-08-31 at 11:07 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > > drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > > f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
> > >
> > > from the dmi tree and commit:
> > >
> > > 5aa5911a0ed9 ("ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()")
> > >
> > > from the pm tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> >
> > Below, where?
>
> Oops sorry, I think this is it:
The merge change below looks good to me.
Thanks,
-Toshi
>
> d75dc5255183bfae1181f5e1e8b260f18794d79d
> diff --cc drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
> index f58bbc368f88,037fd537bbf6..995c4d8922b1
> --- a/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
> @@@ -30,24 -30,7 +30,7 @@@
>
> #include "internal.h"
>
> - enum acpi_blacklist_predicates {
> - all_versions,
> - less_than_or_equal,
> - equal,
> - greater_than_or_equal,
> - };
> -
> - struct acpi_blacklist_item {
> - char oem_id[7];
> - char oem_table_id[9];
> - u32 oem_revision;
> - char *table;
> - enum acpi_blacklist_predicates oem_revision_predicate;
> - char *reason;
> - u32 is_critical_error;
> - };
> -
> -static struct dmi_system_id acpi_rev_dmi_table[] __initdata;
> +static const struct dmi_system_id acpi_rev_dmi_table[] __initconst;
>
> /*
> * POLICY: If *anything* doesn't work, put it on the blacklist.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree
@ 2017-08-07 1:40 Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-04 4:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-08-07 1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Jean Delvare
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Christoph Hellwig, Lukas Wunner
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
drivers/acpi/sbs.c
between commit:
f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
from the dmi tree and commit:
630b3aff8a51 ("treewide: Consolidate Apple DMI checks")
from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (the latter removed the declaration updated by the former)
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree
2017-08-07 1:40 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-09-04 4:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-09-04 4:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Jean Delvare
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Christoph Hellwig, Lukas Wunner
Hi all,
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 11:40:33 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/acpi/sbs.c
>
> between commit:
>
> f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
>
> from the dmi tree and commit:
>
> 630b3aff8a51 ("treewide: Consolidate Apple DMI checks")
>
> from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter removed the declaration updated by the former)
> 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.
Just a reminder that the above conflict still exists.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-04 23:17 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-08-31 1:07 linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-01 13:20 ` Jean Delvare
2017-09-04 6:37 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-04 23:17 ` Kani, Toshimitsu
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-08-07 1:40 Stephen Rothwell
2017-09-04 4:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).