From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Cc: Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Linux Next Mailing List" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
"Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with the mm-unstable tree
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 06:06:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114050605.GA26424@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251114151321.092927a1@canb.auug.org.au>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 03:13:21PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in:
>
> mm/mempool.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 25c4d8d29dbb ("mempool: clarify behavior of mempool_alloc_preallocated()")
>
> from the mm-unstable tree and commit:
>
> 5c829783e5f8 ("mempool: improve kerneldoc comments")
Hmm, I guess we need to agree on which tree takes mempool patches, then
we can just rebase one side.
I also find 25c4d8d29dbb odd. Yes, with PREEMPT_RT anything taking
spinlocks could sleep in the normal sense, but pretty much everything
in Linux assumes spinlocks as spinning. So if we want to update that
we should agree on global conventions for it and not starting to update
random little functions individually.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 5:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-14 4:13 linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with the mm-unstable tree Stephen Rothwell
2025-11-14 5:06 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2025-11-14 8:46 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-11-14 9:13 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-11-14 11:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-20 13:31 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-11-20 17:51 ` Vlastimil Babka
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-09-04 6:29 Stephen Rothwell
2025-09-04 8:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-09-04 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2025-09-04 6:20 Stephen Rothwell
2025-07-21 4:20 Stephen Rothwell
2025-07-21 19:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-07-21 21:35 ` Luiz Capitulino
2025-07-22 8:30 ` Vlastimil Babka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251114050605.GA26424@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox