Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with the rcu tree

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 03:37:46PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   95d4e9e339d1 ("rcu: Provide a get_completed_synchronize_rcu() function")
> 
> from the rcu tree and commit:
> 
>   d9ab0e63fa7f ("sched: Move rt_period/runtime sysctls to rt.c")
> 
> from the sysctl 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.

Thank you, Stephen!  I have this one marked down.

							Thanx, Paul

> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> index 15b96f990774,7812c740b3bf..000000000000
> --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> @@@ -23,9 -23,8 +23,11 @@@
>   #define RCU_SEQ_CTR_SHIFT	2
>   #define RCU_SEQ_STATE_MASK	((1 << RCU_SEQ_CTR_SHIFT) - 1)
>   
>  +/* Low-order bit definition for polled grace-period APIs. */
>  +#define RCU_GET_STATE_COMPLETED	0x1
>  +
> + extern int sysctl_sched_rt_runtime;
> + 
>   /*
>    * Return the counter portion of a sequence number previously returned
>    * by rcu_seq_snap() or rcu_seq_current().