From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
"Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bitmap tree with the arm64 tree
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 10:07:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240701100750.00002b8e@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240701175051.0ef5d901@canb.auug.org.au>
On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 17:50:51 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bitmap tree got a conflict in:
>
> include/linux/cpumask.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 4e1a7df45480 ("cpumask: Add enabled cpumask for present CPUs that can be brought online")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> 5c563ee90a22 ("cpumask: introduce assign_cpu() macro")
>
> from the bitmap tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just did the obvious - 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 Stephen,
We can make a similar change to the others in
5c563ee90a22 ("cpumask: introduce assign_cpu() macro")
but to avoid merge complexity probably easier to just do it next cycle.
Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-01 9:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-01 7:50 linux-next: manual merge of the bitmap tree with the arm64 tree Stephen Rothwell
2024-07-01 9:07 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-07-01 12:47 ` Catalin Marinas
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-07-15 10:25 Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240701100750.00002b8e@Huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox