From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754281AbdKAI1t (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 1 Nov 2017 04:27:49 -0400
Received: from mail-wr0-f196.google.com ([209.85.128.196]:44557 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751721AbdKAI1r (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 1 Nov 2017 04:27:47 -0400
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+Q9Gi5RrHA7bTgs8oh/vxbdvlfQbn1GQPKIFCPTosI9YSySZUic1S1lpktD6vRAqDIGm3hutQ==
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:27:43 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the net-next tree
Message-ID: <20171101082742.dteg337holmodzn2@gmail.com>
References: <20171101181554.1826e8c8@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20171101081832.zdehp7ysi5ecwsdv@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171101081832.zdehp7ysi5ecwsdv@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 06:15:54PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > 
> > between commits:
> > 
> >   97562633bcba ("bpf: perf event change needed for subsequent bpf helpers")
> > and more changes ...
> > 
> > from the net-next tree and commit:
> > 
> >   7d9285e82db5 ("perf/bpf: Extend the perf_event_read_local() interface, a.k.a. "bpf: perf event change needed for subsequent bpf helpers"")
> > 
> > from the tip tree.
> 
> So those should be the exact same patch; except for Changelog and
> subject. Code wise there shouldn't be a conflict.

So the problem is that then we have:

  0d3d73aac2ff ("perf/core: Rewrite event timekeeping")

which changes the code. This is a known conflict generation pattern: Git isn't 
smart enough to sort out that (probably because it would make merges too 
expensive) - and it's a bad flow in any case.

Thanks,

	Ingo