From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEFB13D69; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 03:09:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736132979; cv=none; b=gs0uvW9Avow1V5WtoXjCKYp3Kas0fnn6gzjZXUWz5pNF7AN7ZztDm7HR7BVbhqEn1PYnNg8u5VkMUJ1LJ3SulAvdQHm7Ul79o8u8zg8tcW55UdPxiNz/MMEi/OvNpMKCANhoiNxrr7k292Hn0t+oBIMnqN9O3wadvrRT5ACuYMM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736132979; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1fKuf5tCIA07T7uP0hby637bkNQdcJ70kZB8SCkkaOQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fu4EjUGFjnIguK2aqCNA4PqTKfT4oFQrmuMVBkdrGczveciMuNHs56JZQmEOU5juiAnfh51nw6ZsOVofu+ZToQ6KMUbU4iC6CcnDUf85Tm6EnuM7HZmMyfcPpsL2q44HuaARtTMdXDKUnKmQ+EFk6ZmxJtzWUBlW14jGd9rC9Fk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b=F5h+0/vg; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="F5h+0/vg" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1736132963; bh=GLdh3mNJ20XsJe1cVfVLWwYPjbqOD9haQe5s49WEWkA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=F5h+0/vg7FmnouyNleI1zDC7WnTK7qZkJXelA1c9I1GW3Z2q2/VlWtpsEb6WqfdKP ApsxYM0zPrNL4CtjcLlQ9Ki3fjT62YSFPQUQE/3kvghlVoQkpJ8lrsmsNvKPbEcU1K p7fG6qpdXAzDY1oBaOohrKEEWT3tB10HelD26R5PQjffqPiCTb4EDBlr8ilmpnhjeu 9kd3SSO5BZLdTpH1VA1ZRxLT6fM1Ptj6sGOHV1rwS3kNK7IOhujwgfbaNLeof/9jki TK/KU6W9qAluLLjTxIA/MAGMGuUkycxLD7qRgjFHD4gO1jcous4bajsaxXaaYTjHPy EkGMFM8F5cbMw== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YRK0L63YKz4w2H; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:09:22 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:09:28 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Suren Baghdasaryan Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the mm tree Message-ID: <20250106140928.50569876@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20241209132446.77fcb14b@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20241209132446.77fcb14b@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_//r9g2Ki3jJp_PbT3qFKHPdY"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 --Sig_//r9g2Ki3jJp_PbT3qFKHPdY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:24:46 +1100 Stephen Rothwell w= rote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got conflicts in: >=20 > include/linux/mm.h > include/linux/mm_types.h > kernel/fork.c > tools/testing/vma/vma_internal.h >=20 > between commits: >=20 > 5f0d64389e1f ("mm: convert mm_lock_seq to a proper seqcount") > 062111898568 ("mm: move per-vma lock into vm_area_struct") > 85ad413389ae ("mm: make vma cache SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU") >=20 > from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit: >=20 > eb449bd96954 ("mm: convert mm_lock_seq to a proper seqcount") >=20 > from the tip tree. >=20 > Note that commits 5f0d64389e1f and eb449bd96954 are identical patches. >=20 > I fixed it up (I used the mm tree version) 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. I got 2 more conflicts today due to the duplicate patch above. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_//r9g2Ki3jJp_PbT3qFKHPdY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmd7SWgACgkQAVBC80lX 0GzSlQf+L9HeH1z7Vi1Zaw9t/4GAbti4Vsx7A+J/eonjTjndLbExsp/zBz2veAQW tQKw5/MYEBUPoEmWL0CLMCpgCWNflr/S5AXTXNJDxLo8ynPqSrzk3h/Fz8940Wzy OPKIuzdJZ8B0MeryBgeQYmxpGnSdLGv9Hv+zERcQRMe5Ybdj0JcGQ7m3wAVMpt/E 6StXlaI5DIJVxo/RlEES5VpyruZ8ZXzwTKJMm9XmbeIpD51SRwTfv/58lovSS8Lt Xgps+u1yA0M59B0U+0hToumsWxxCh2vWIu//AROMCkXZVc4stwUCSinvwzmslYJh YBn4WvF4zL46oA1qe9c9UcOxE3aO8w== =ut8X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//r9g2Ki3jJp_PbT3qFKHPdY--