From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:25:54 +0100
Message-ID: <20131025132553.GE9999@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <1382632289-18523-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com>
 <1382706224-8859-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com>
 <1382706224-8859-4-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:49086 "EHLO
	cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753835Ab3JYN0k (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-next@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 25 Oct 2013 09:26:40 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1382706224-8859-4-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com>
Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-next.vger.kernel.org>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc: Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@linaro.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:03:42PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got conflicts in
> 
>         tools/perf/config/Makefile
>         tools/perf/config/feature-tests.mak
> 
> caused by commits 405ffbd (perf tools: Check libunwind for availability of
> dwarf parsing feature) and mostly 308e1e7 (tools/perf/build: Clean up the
> libunwind logic in config/Makefile) as well as various follow-up patches.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below). Please verify that the resolution looks good.
> Also note that this isn't really a trivial resolution of a conflict, but
> required modifying various other files. That causes rerere magic not to
> work and needs part of conflict to be resolved manually. Perhaps a good
> idea would be to rebase Jean's patch on top of the cleanups going on in
> the tip tree? Perhaps even carry the patch in the tip tree?

These came via my tree (arm perf) after discussion here:

  http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/203077.html

Now that they've been pulled by rmk, we can't back them out with ugly
reverts, so I'm not sure what we can do to resolve in the ARM tree; it looks
like the perf Makefile has changed significantly in -tip.

Will