linux-next: manual merge of the iommufd tree with the vfio-fixes tree

linux-next: manual merge of the iommufd tree with the vfio-fixes tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 827 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the iommufd tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c

between commit:

  7fdba0011157 ("vfio: Fix container device registration life cycle")

from the vfio-fixes tree and commit:

  55e16a188913 ("vfio: Move vfio_device driver open/close code to a function")

from the iommufd tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the latter version since it seems to
incorporate the former change) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommufd tree with the vfio-fixes tree

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the iommufd tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   7fdba0011157 ("vfio: Fix container device registration life cycle")
> 
> from the vfio-fixes tree and commit:
> 
>   55e16a188913 ("vfio: Move vfio_device driver open/close code to a function")
> 
> from the iommufd tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just used the latter version since it seems to
> incorporate the former change) and can carry the fix as necessary. 

Yes, that is right, it is as Alex and I discussed

Thanks
Jason

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommufd tree with the vfio-fixes tree

[Alex Williamson]

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 09:35:39 -0400
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the iommufd tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   7fdba0011157 ("vfio: Fix container device registration life cycle")
> > 
> > from the vfio-fixes tree and commit:
> > 
> >   55e16a188913 ("vfio: Move vfio_device driver open/close code to a function")
> > 
> > from the iommufd tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (I just used the latter version since it seems to
> > incorporate the former change) and can carry the fix as necessary.   
> 
> Yes, that is right, it is as Alex and I discussed

My plan is to merge back my fixes branch after it gets pulled into
v6.1-rc so the vfio-iommufd support can be re-based to avoid this for
v6.2.  Thanks,

Alex

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommufd tree with the vfio-fixes tree

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 08:32:07AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 09:35:39 -0400
> Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the iommufd tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >   drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> > > 
> > > between commit:
> > > 
> > >   7fdba0011157 ("vfio: Fix container device registration life cycle")
> > > 
> > > from the vfio-fixes tree and commit:
> > > 
> > >   55e16a188913 ("vfio: Move vfio_device driver open/close code to a function")
> > > 
> > > from the iommufd tree.
> > > 
> > > I fixed it up (I just used the latter version since it seems to
> > > incorporate the former change) and can carry the fix as necessary.   
> > 
> > Yes, that is right, it is as Alex and I discussed
> 
> My plan is to merge back my fixes branch after it gets pulled into
> v6.1-rc so the vfio-iommufd support can be re-based to avoid this for
> v6.2.  Thanks,

It is fine, I will just merge v6.1 release into iommufd as-is, at the
end of the cycle, as I often do to fixup these rc conflicts.

At this point, due to all the testing, I don't really want to rebase
iommufd any further if I can avoid it.

Jason