Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1086 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 7 May 2018 12:09:09 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e782bdcf58c5 ("bpf, x64: remove ld_abs/ld_ind")
> 
> from the bpf-next tree and commit:
> 
>   5f26c50143f5 ("x86/bpf: Clean up non-standard comments, to make the code more readable")
> 
> from the tip tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the former commit removed some code modified by the latter,
> so I just removed it) 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.

Actually the tip tree commit has been added to the bpf-next tree as a
different commit, so dropping it from the tip tree will clean this up.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]