From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the tip tree Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 13:50:29 +1000 Message-ID: <20170731135029.479025ea@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:37965 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751615AbdGaDuc (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:50:32 -0400 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "Paul E. McKenney" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andy Lutomirski , Mathieu Desnoyers Hi Paul, Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/mm/tlb.c between commit: 94b1b03b519b ("x86/mm: Rework lazy TLB mode and TLB freshness tracking") from the tip tree and commit: d7713e8f8b23 ("membarrier: Expedited private command") from the rcu tree. I fixed it up (the former removed the comment and the load_cr3(), so I just dropped the commend change in the latter) 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