From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (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 8812219C54E; Tue, 25 Feb 2025 19:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740511953; cv=none; b=m+PMS4zYPt2q9S8U658ybUXwWKuzLvEAjHQA/ClzbF4glvB1H87cdVrI77u2f3gTcuCJ/g+LukAOdR3YKY1rJ0KGFFuBlmPaNArTBED6zHTQmcr+5G+Pb1xc9hc6/VWZLwCOP8PDy72l2WgJvowCYvoG9LneJknSzEaMOjqs5dA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740511953; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7iwwXU581HFoOelmrhDURpbOv86LLeA6R9xvq5cHtJM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=PxhpAfJshm1QOAUgT0lfWP7mgclNdD0618woM8/Msj5U1VC5ScAwUqGhVpJ7RjA4/W/S2s2JBV4m7cf8+Ep3LrydlWU9CGXAHRJKemfHj8/ODxF3PrW22ZJ11lgK1IzqU2pJCQ89gR9KhQlTPBZnk2rQbaYqbglVpruvbvSgQzs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=05XqCl7+; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=/sjWN9Sc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="05XqCl7+"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="/sjWN9Sc" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1740511949; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A1jrPjukilEBv/hCspf7pK3WQBodfY1qOus5kpYrl0A=; b=05XqCl7+rroFfSpzh8rf4lEoVqW0KOrVtQmsUKdcI+0vaGI3amHZq400VzX2W3yvjNMwRd bPtU/L04nopm6KxKxuy/SQZMIjscGMbJY61TuUmfbCR2esFtqbjxOdvnCDiKDOkc2SV//F 4ClJWH1R8cZ30NMTn5zlh3IqGnVuSK1FVLGj6d0fanW2OZeo1qkG4YgkGG/o7hSBHOrmTx NG9kmfk08VqfnCxqGPrMD0JWrSyc8iNdbrwxKQZSd/a8ZF2UO/tc25GVNRC5MgcpJC+60b A8jqai7VPjn6024cOpdj5cQ3/qGVvrb/mNo2EO2Je7yEA/6iY8RG7QaGnIrOqQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1740511949; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A1jrPjukilEBv/hCspf7pK3WQBodfY1qOus5kpYrl0A=; b=/sjWN9ScmJcMJ5ahcCAfCkCpsCMbrvLAHIGJVEjuMzmC6vZx80GwfZ/wTkh3kQjDCd396H 1tiPFTwUhJ87RhDA== To: John Garry , Stephen Rothwell , "Martin K. Petersen" , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra Cc: Bart Van Assche , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Nam Cao Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi-mkp tree with the tip tree In-Reply-To: References: <20250225153200.00773d86@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 20:32:28 +0100 Message-ID: <87h64hg6r7.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Tue, Feb 25 2025 at 09:38, John Garry wrote: > On 25/02/2025 04:32, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi-mkp tree got a conflict in: >> >> drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c >> >> between commit: >> >> b7011929380d ("scsi: Switch to use hrtimer_setup()") >> >> from the tip tree and commit: >> >> b441eafbd1eb ("scsi: scsi_debug: Simplify command handling") >> >> from the scsi-mkp tree. >> >> I fixed it up (I think - 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. >> > static int sdebug_init_cmd_priv(struct Scsi_Host *shost, struct > scsi_cmnd *cmd) > { > struct sdebug_scsi_cmd *sdsc = scsi_cmd_priv(cmd); > struct sdebug_defer *sd_dp = &sdsc->sd_dp; > > spin_lock_init(&sdsc->lock); > hrtimer_setup(&sd_dp->hrt, sdebug_q_cmd_hrt_complete, CLOCK_MONOTONIC, > HRTIMER_MODE_REL_PINNED); > sd_dp->hrt.function = sdebug_q_cmd_hrt_complete; *** > INIT_WORK(&sd_dp->ew.work, sdebug_q_cmd_wq_complete); > > > I guess that setting sd_dp->hrt.function explicitly, at *** above, is > not needed (as hrtimer_setup()) does this. Correct. hrtimer_setup is enough. Thanks, tglx