Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the kvm tree

From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the kvm tree
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2022 15:23:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <865yevm9lw.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221201131623.18ebc8d8@canb.auug.org.au>

On Thu, 01 Dec 2022 02:16:23 +0000,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/perf_test_util.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   9fda6753c9dd ("KVM: selftests: Rename perf_test_util.[ch] to memstress.[ch]")
> 
> from the kvm tree and commit:
> 
>   9ec1eb1bccee ("KVM: selftests: Have perf_test_util signal when to stop vCPUs")
> 
> from the kvm-arm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I removed the file and applied the following patch) 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.
> 
> (this patch covered another occurrence fo the needed rename)

Huh, this is a lot of conflicts.

Paolo, do you have a stable branch I can pull in my tree to kill
those? Or do you want to deal with the conflicts yourself?

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.