linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the kunit-next tree

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the kunit-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1400 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:

  lib/kunit/test.c

between commit:

  45dcbb6f5ef7 ("kunit: test: add test plan to KUnit TAP format")

from the kunit-next tree and commit:

  e685acc91080 ("KUnit: KASAN Integration")

from the akpm-current 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 lib/kunit/test.c
index de07876b6601,dcc35fd30d95..000000000000
--- a/lib/kunit/test.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
@@@ -15,11 -16,16 +16,6 @@@
  #include "string-stream.h"
  #include "try-catch-impl.h"
  
- static void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test)
 -static void kunit_print_tap_version(void)
--{
- 	WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false);
 -	static bool kunit_has_printed_tap_version;
 -
 -	if (!kunit_has_printed_tap_version) {
 -		pr_info("TAP version 14\n");
 -		kunit_has_printed_tap_version = true;
 -	}
--}
--
  /*
   * Append formatted message to log, size of which is limited to
   * KUNIT_LOG_SIZE bytes (including null terminating byte).

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the kunit-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1645 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 19:56:49 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   lib/kunit/test.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   45dcbb6f5ef7 ("kunit: test: add test plan to KUnit TAP format")
> 
> from the kunit-next tree and commit:
> 
>   e685acc91080 ("KUnit: KASAN Integration")
> 
> from the akpm-current 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.
> 
> diff --cc lib/kunit/test.c
> index de07876b6601,dcc35fd30d95..000000000000
> --- a/lib/kunit/test.c
> +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
> @@@ -15,11 -16,16 +16,6 @@@
>   #include "string-stream.h"
>   #include "try-catch-impl.h"
>   
> - static void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test)
>  -static void kunit_print_tap_version(void)
> --{
> - 	WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false);
>  -	static bool kunit_has_printed_tap_version;
>  -
>  -	if (!kunit_has_printed_tap_version) {
>  -		pr_info("TAP version 14\n");
>  -		kunit_has_printed_tap_version = true;
>  -	}
> --}
> --
>   /*
>    * Append formatted message to log, size of which is limited to
>    * KUNIT_LOG_SIZE bytes (including null terminating byte).

This is now a conflict between the kunit-next tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the kunit-next tree

[Shuah Khan]

On 10/14/20 11:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 19:56:49 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>>
>>    lib/kunit/test.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>>    45dcbb6f5ef7 ("kunit: test: add test plan to KUnit TAP format")
>>
>> from the kunit-next tree and commit:
>>
>>    e685acc91080 ("KUnit: KASAN Integration")
>>
>> from the akpm-current 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.
>>
>> diff --cc lib/kunit/test.c
>> index de07876b6601,dcc35fd30d95..000000000000
>> --- a/lib/kunit/test.c
>> +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
>> @@@ -15,11 -16,16 +16,6 @@@
>>    #include "string-stream.h"
>>    #include "try-catch-impl.h"
>>    
>> - static void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test)
>>   -static void kunit_print_tap_version(void)
>> --{
>> - 	WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false);
>>   -	static bool kunit_has_printed_tap_version;
>>   -
>>   -	if (!kunit_has_printed_tap_version) {
>>   -		pr_info("TAP version 14\n");
>>   -		kunit_has_printed_tap_version = true;
>>   -	}
>> --}
>> --
>>    /*
>>     * Append formatted message to log, size of which is limited to
>>     * KUNIT_LOG_SIZE bytes (including null terminating byte).
> 
> This is now a conflict between the kunit-next tree and Linus' tree.
> 

Thanks Stephen. I will mention this conflict in my pull request to
Linus.

Thanks,
-- Shuah