From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the s390 tree
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 17:04:13 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171101170413.7d06a1c1@canb.auug.org.au> (raw)
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
arch/s390/lib/spinlock.c
between commit:
eb3b7b848fb3 ("s390/rwlock: introduce rwlock wait queueing")
(at least)
from the s390 tree and commit:
6aa7de059173 ("locking/atomics: COCCINELLE/treewide: Convert trivial ACCESS_ONCE() patterns to READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE()")
from the tip tree.
I fixed it up (the ACCESS_ONCE instances replaced in the latter were
removed by the former ... there was one more ACCESS_ONCE added, but I
left it in place) 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
next reply other threads:[~2017-11-01 6:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-01 6:04 Stephen Rothwell [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-04-18 13:40 linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the s390 tree broonie
2023-02-10 1:00 Stephen Rothwell
2023-02-21 23:03 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-05-06 6:58 Stephen Rothwell
2017-10-11 15:51 Mark Brown
2017-11-13 5:30 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-20 5:32 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-07 2:50 Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-14 3:46 Stephen Rothwell
2009-08-24 7:01 Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171101170413.7d06a1c1@canb.auug.org.au \
--to=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).