linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-x86 tree with the kvm6390 tree

linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-x86 tree with the kvm6390 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 820 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-x86 tree got a conflict in:

  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore

between commit:

  011901fc2224 ("selftests: kvm: s390: Add s390x ucontrol test suite with hpage test")

from the kvm6390 tree and commit:

  9d15171f39f0 ("KVM: selftests: Explicitly include committed one-off assets in .gitignore")

from the kvm-x86 tree.

I fixed it up (the latter includes the former) 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 kvm-x86 tree with the kvm6390 tree

[Sean Christopherson]

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-x86 tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   tools/testing/selftests/kvm/.gitignore
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   011901fc2224 ("selftests: kvm: s390: Add s390x ucontrol test suite with hpage test")
> 
> from the kvm6390 tree and commit:
> 
>   9d15171f39f0 ("KVM: selftests: Explicitly include committed one-off assets in .gitignore")
> 
> from the kvm-x86 tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the latter includes the former) and can carry the fix as

Ya, I'll make sure to note this in my pull request to Paolo, but I don't think
there's anything else to be done at this time.

Thanks Stephen!

> 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.