On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 02:01:47PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:58:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > Hi Leon, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in: > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code") > > > > from the rdma tree and commit: > > > > c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device") > > > > from the mlx5-next tree. > > > > I fixed it up (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. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Stephen Rothwell > > > > diff --cc drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > > index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000 > > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c > > @@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not > > > > switch (event) { > > case NETDEV_REGISTER: > > + /* Should already be registered during the load */ > > + if (ibdev->is_rep) > > + break; > > write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock); > > - if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev) > > - if (ibdev->rep) { > > - struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch; > > - struct net_device *rep_ndev; > > - > > - rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw, > > - ibdev->rep->vport); > > - if (rep_ndev == ndev) > > - roce->netdev = ndev; > > - } else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) { > > ++ if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) > > roce->netdev = ndev; > > - } > > write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock); > > break; > > > > This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree. Thanks Stephen, Looks good. > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell