linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 607 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a trivial context
conflicts in arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c, arch/x86/xen/mmu.c and
arch/x86/xen/mmu.h between commit
28499143933f19b28008a556ed59255d6009391a ("xen: remove support for
non-PAE 32-bit") from Linus' tree (and also exists in the tip-core tree)
and commit e2426cf85f8db5891fb5831323d2d0c176c4dadc ("xen: avoid
hypercalls when updating unpinned pud/pmd") from the tip-core tree.

I fixed it up and will carry the fixup.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a trivial context
> conflicts in arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c, arch/x86/xen/mmu.c and
> arch/x86/xen/mmu.h between commit
> 28499143933f19b28008a556ed59255d6009391a ("xen: remove support for
> non-PAE 32-bit") from Linus' tree (and also exists in the tip-core tree)
> and commit e2426cf85f8db5891fb5831323d2d0c176c4dadc ("xen: avoid
> hypercalls when updating unpinned pud/pmd") from the tip-core tree.
>
> I fixed it up and will carry the fixup.
>
>   

Great thanks.

    J

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Ingo Molnar]

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a trivial context 
> conflicts in arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c, arch/x86/xen/mmu.c and 
> arch/x86/xen/mmu.h between commit 
> 28499143933f19b28008a556ed59255d6009391a ("xen: remove support for 
> non-PAE 32-bit") from Linus' tree (and also exists in the tip-core 
> tree) and commit e2426cf85f8db5891fb5831323d2d0c176c4dadc ("xen: avoid 
> hypercalls when updating unpinned pud/pmd") from the tip-core tree.
> 
> I fixed it up and will carry the fixup.

thanks Stephen. This conflict should go away on the next -tip 
integration run. (I'm wondering why Git didnt manage to do a clean merge 
here - this was a cleanly cherry-picked commit that went upstream.)

	Ingo

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1868 bytes --]

Hi Ingo,

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:17:45 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> (I'm wondering why Git didnt manage to do a clean merge 
> here - this was a cleanly cherry-picked commit that went upstream.)

Here is what Linus had to say about this just a few days ago:

"However, since conflicts clearly happen, let's look at what *does* cause 
conflicts. It's not the existence of the same patch to the same area in a 
file. It's about *different* patches to the same area in a file.

If you have two development trees that have the exact same changes to some 
area in a file, then the merge algorithm with be very happy, and just 
merge those changes. It's the standard three-way merge.

HOWEVER! If there are _other_ changes that overlap (and aren't identical), 
then *that* is when conflicts happen. And that is true regardless of 
whether the history also contains some identical changes. IOW, if you have

 - patch A (in _both_ histories)
 - patch B (in just _one_ of the histories)

and they overlap, then that will be a conflict. And now, since the 
original file will have *neither* A nor B, the conflict will basically be 
the union of A and B - the three-way merge does not care at all about the 
fact hat A existed twice, because qutie frankly, maybe B was a _fix_ to A, 
and even though A exists in both branches, it may well be that A on it's 
own is pure and utter sh*t and shoult not be merged.

See?

So identical patches (with different commits) in two trees is not what 
causes problems. It's the *non-identical* ones that cause problms. And if 
they overlap with the identical ones, even partially, then yes, you'll 
have to resolve not just the non-identical ones, but the identical ones 
too."

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 617 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a trivial conflict in
kernel/softlockup.c between commit
3b7253238801a7b97b3929d8db2fa7a0721fb17b ("softlockup: print a module
list on being stuck") from Linus' tree (which also exists in the tip-core
tree) and commit 8d5be7f4e8515af461cbc8f07687ccc81507d508 ("softlockup:
show irqtrace") from the tip-core tree.

It is just tha the latter change modifies the section of code modified by
the former.  I fixed it up and can carry the fix.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Ingo Molnar]

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a trivial conflict 
> in kernel/softlockup.c between commit 
> 3b7253238801a7b97b3929d8db2fa7a0721fb17b ("softlockup: print a module 
> list on being stuck") from Linus' tree (which also exists in the 
> tip-core tree) and commit 8d5be7f4e8515af461cbc8f07687ccc81507d508 
> ("softlockup: show irqtrace") from the tip-core tree.
> 
> It is just tha the latter change modifies the section of code modified 
> by the former.  I fixed it up and can carry the fix.

Thanks Stephen - this should be resolved by today's auto-core-next 
iteration as well. (which you'll pick up tomorrow-ish)

	Ingo

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 933 bytes --]

Hi Ingo,

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:12:32 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a trivial conflict 
> > in kernel/softlockup.c between commit 
> > 3b7253238801a7b97b3929d8db2fa7a0721fb17b ("softlockup: print a module 
> > list on being stuck") from Linus' tree (which also exists in the 
> > tip-core tree) and commit 8d5be7f4e8515af461cbc8f07687ccc81507d508 
> > ("softlockup: show irqtrace") from the tip-core tree.
> > 
> > It is just tha the latter change modifies the section of code modified 
> > by the former.  I fixed it up and can carry the fix.
> 
> Thanks Stephen - this should be resolved by today's auto-core-next 
> iteration as well. (which you'll pick up tomorrow-ish)

Thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 384 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a conflict in
lib/vsprintf.c between several commits from Linus' tree and commit
bf4bb495e5dc8f1abba98bb6cb08b2d94446a662 ("printk: add support for '%
pS'") from the tip-core tree.

I just used Linus' version.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 540 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a conflict in
include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h between commit
c6de002617c199f80f9a2a713dffc263bdc69b81 ("Missing symbol prefix on
vmlinux.lds.h") from Linus' tree and commit
d3794979a8a80c222ce9d016a6dfc4bed36965d0 ("Zero based percpu:
infrastructure to rebase the per cpu area to zero") from the tip-core
tree.

Just simple overlapping changes,  I fixed it up.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1717 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a conflict in
arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype between commit
4ee7084eb11e00eb02dc8435fd18273a61ffa9bf ("Allow 32-bit hashed pgtable
code to support 36-bit physical") from the powerpc tree and commit
8308c54d7e312f7a03e2ce2057d0837e6fe3843f ("redefine resource_size_t as
phys_addr_t") from the tip-core tree.

Just context.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix (assuming
it is correct).
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

diff --cc arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
index 439c5ba,be852fd..0000000
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
@@@ -129,20 -128,17 +129,19 @@@ config FSL_EMB_PERFMO
  
  config PTE_64BIT
  	bool
 -	depends on 44x || E500
 -	default y if 44x
 -	default y if E500 && PHYS_64BIT
 +	depends on 44x || E500 || PPC_86xx
 +	default y if PHYS_64BIT
  
  config PHYS_64BIT
 -	bool 'Large physical address support' if E500
 -	depends on 44x || E500
 -	default y if 44x
 +	bool 'Large physical address support' if E500 || PPC_86xx
 +	depends on (44x || E500 || PPC_86xx) && !PPC_83xx && !PPC_82xx
- 	select RESOURCES_64BIT
  	---help---
  	  This option enables kernel support for larger than 32-bit physical
 -	  addresses.  This features is not be available on all e500 cores.
 +	  addresses.  This feature may not be available on all cores.
 +
 +	  If you have more than 3.5GB of RAM or so, you also need to enable
 +	  SWIOTLB under Kernel Options for this to work.  The actual number
 +	  is platform-dependent.
  
  	  If in doubt, say N here.
  

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1158 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a conflict in
arch/powerpc/include/asm/types.h between commit
b9579689ad3a208c342aed806afc7a9a808c4e1e ("powerpc: Make dma_addr_t a u64
if CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT is set") from the powerpc tree and commit
600715dcdf567c86f8b2c6173fcfb4b873e25a19 ("generic: add phys_addr_t for
holding physical addresses") from the tip-core tree.

Just a context clash.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

diff --cc arch/powerpc/include/asm/types.h
index a9a9262,c646f34..0000000
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/types.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/types.h
@@@ -48,14 -48,7 +48,7 @@@ typedef struct 
  
  typedef __vector128 vector128;
  
- /* Physical address used by some IO functions */
- #if defined(CONFIG_PPC64) || defined(CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT)
- typedef u64 phys_addr_t;
- #else
- typedef u32 phys_addr_t;
- #endif
- 
 -#ifdef __powerpc64__
 +#if defined(__powerpc64__) || defined(CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT)
  typedef u64 dma_addr_t;
  #else
  typedef u32 dma_addr_t;


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]