From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the tip tree Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 08:58:26 +0100 Message-ID: <5729ABA2.5040403@arm.com> References: <20160504134918.11edacf7@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:43492 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751478AbcEDH6e (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 May 2016 03:58:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160504134918.11edacf7@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell , Christoffer Dall , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Julien Grall On 04/05/16 04:49, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c > > between commit: > > e3825ba1af3a ("irqchip/gic-v3: Add support for partitioned PPIs") > > from the tip tree and commit: > > 1839e576968f ("irqchip/gic-v3: Parse and export virtual GIC information") > > from the kvm-arm 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. Looks good, thanks Stephen. M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...