linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1672 bytes --]

Hi Leon,

Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c

between commit:

  35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code")

from the rdma tree and commit:

  c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device")

from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
@@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not
  
  	switch (event) {
  	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
 +		/* Should already be registered during the load */
 +		if (ibdev->is_rep)
 +			break;
  		write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock);
- 		if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev)
 -		if (ibdev->rep) {
 -			struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch;
 -			struct net_device *rep_ndev;
 -
 -			rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw,
 -							  ibdev->rep->vport);
 -			if (rep_ndev == ndev)
 -				roce->netdev = ndev;
 -		} else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) {
++		if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device)
  			roce->netdev = ndev;
 -		}
  		write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock);
  		break;
  

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1984 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:58:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Leon,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code")
> 
> from the rdma tree and commit:
> 
>   c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device")
> 
> from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> @@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not
>   
>   	switch (event) {
>   	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
>  +		/* Should already be registered during the load */
>  +		if (ibdev->is_rep)
>  +			break;
>   		write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> - 		if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev)
>  -		if (ibdev->rep) {
>  -			struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch;
>  -			struct net_device *rep_ndev;
>  -
>  -			rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw,
>  -							  ibdev->rep->vport);
>  -			if (rep_ndev == ndev)
>  -				roce->netdev = ndev;
>  -		} else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) {
> ++		if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device)
>   			roce->netdev = ndev;
>  -		}
>   		write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock);
>   		break;
>   

This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Leon Romanovsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2126 bytes --]

On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 02:01:47PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:58:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Leon,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code")
> >
> > from the rdma tree and commit:
> >
> >   c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device")
> >
> > from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000
> > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > @@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not
> >
> >   	switch (event) {
> >   	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
> >  +		/* Should already be registered during the load */
> >  +		if (ibdev->is_rep)
> >  +			break;
> >   		write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> > - 		if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev)
> >  -		if (ibdev->rep) {
> >  -			struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch;
> >  -			struct net_device *rep_ndev;
> >  -
> >  -			rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw,
> >  -							  ibdev->rep->vport);
> >  -			if (rep_ndev == ndev)
> >  -				roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		} else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) {
> > ++		if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device)
> >   			roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		}
> >   		write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> >   		break;
> >
>
> This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

Thanks Stephen,
Looks good.

>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2254 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 6 May 2019 14:01:47 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> 
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:58:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Leon,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code")
> > 
> > from the rdma tree and commit:
> > 
> >   c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device")
> > 
> > from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000
> > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > @@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not
> >   
> >   	switch (event) {
> >   	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
> >  +		/* Should already be registered during the load */
> >  +		if (ibdev->is_rep)
> >  +			break;
> >   		write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> > - 		if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev)
> >  -		if (ibdev->rep) {
> >  -			struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch;
> >  -			struct net_device *rep_ndev;
> >  -
> >  -			rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw,
> >  -							  ibdev->rep->vport);
> >  -			if (rep_ndev == ndev)
> >  -				roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		} else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) {
> > ++		if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device)
> >   			roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		}
> >   		write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> >   		break;
> >     
> 
> This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

And now between the rdma 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 mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Leon Romanovsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 988 bytes --]

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:59:20PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   2be08c308f10 ("RDMA/mlx5: Delete create QP flags obfuscation")
>
> from the rdma tree and commit:
>
>   14c129e30152 ("{IB/net}/mlx5: Simplify don't trap code")
>
> from the mlx5-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter change included the former) 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.

Thanks Stephen,

The mlx5-next branch was merged to rdma-next tonight and this conflict
will disappear in next the linux-next.

Thanks

>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 767 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c

between commit:

  2be08c308f10 ("RDMA/mlx5: Delete create QP flags obfuscation")

from the rdma tree and commit:

  14c129e30152 ("{IB/net}/mlx5: Simplify don't trap code")

from the mlx5-next tree.

I fixed it up (the latter change included the former) 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

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:28:37PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 12:47:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   e39afe3d6dbd ("RDMA: Convert CQ allocations to be under core responsibility")
> > 
> > from the rdma tree and commit:
> > 
> >   38164b771947 ("net/mlx5: mlx5_core_create_cq() enhancements")
> > 
> > from the mlx5-next 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.
> > 
> 
> This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

You'll see the mlx5-next merge with rdma tomorrow that will take care
of this

Thanks,
Jason

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1592 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 12:47:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e39afe3d6dbd ("RDMA: Convert CQ allocations to be under core responsibility")
> 
> from the rdma tree and commit:
> 
>   38164b771947 ("net/mlx5: mlx5_core_create_cq() enhancements")
> 
> from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> index bfe3efdd77d7,4efbbd2fce0c..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> @@@ -891,7 -891,8 +891,8 @@@ int mlx5_ib_create_cq(struct ib_cq *ibc
>   	int entries = attr->cqe;
>   	int vector = attr->comp_vector;
>   	struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev = to_mdev(ibdev);
> + 	u32 out[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(create_cq_out)];
>  -	struct mlx5_ib_cq *cq;
>  +	struct mlx5_ib_cq *cq = to_mcq(ibcq);
>   	int uninitialized_var(index);
>   	int uninitialized_var(inlen);
>   	u32 *cqb = NULL;

This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Leon Romanovsky]

On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 12:47:38PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   e39afe3d6dbd ("RDMA: Convert CQ allocations to be under core responsibility")
>
> from the rdma tree and commit:
>
>   38164b771947 ("net/mlx5: mlx5_core_create_cq() enhancements")
>
> from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> index bfe3efdd77d7,4efbbd2fce0c..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> @@@ -891,7 -891,8 +891,8 @@@ int mlx5_ib_create_cq(struct ib_cq *ibc
>   	int entries = attr->cqe;
>   	int vector = attr->comp_vector;
>   	struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev = to_mdev(ibdev);
> + 	u32 out[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(create_cq_out)];
>  -	struct mlx5_ib_cq *cq;
>  +	struct mlx5_ib_cq *cq = to_mcq(ibcq);
>   	int uninitialized_var(index);
>   	int uninitialized_var(inlen);
>   	u32 *cqb = NULL;

Thanks, it looks good.

linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1309 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c

between commit:

  e39afe3d6dbd ("RDMA: Convert CQ allocations to be under core responsibility")

from the rdma tree and commit:

  38164b771947 ("net/mlx5: mlx5_core_create_cq() enhancements")

from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
index bfe3efdd77d7,4efbbd2fce0c..000000000000
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
@@@ -891,7 -891,8 +891,8 @@@ int mlx5_ib_create_cq(struct ib_cq *ibc
  	int entries = attr->cqe;
  	int vector = attr->comp_vector;
  	struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev = to_mdev(ibdev);
+ 	u32 out[MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(create_cq_out)];
 -	struct mlx5_ib_cq *cq;
 +	struct mlx5_ib_cq *cq = to_mcq(ibcq);
  	int uninitialized_var(index);
  	int uninitialized_var(inlen);
  	u32 *cqb = NULL;

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Leon Romanovsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 563 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 01:10:50PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 20:33:08 -0500 Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > FWIW this will go away in a day or two.  I merged mlx5-next into rdma
> > for-next in order to take a series that depended on it.
>
> Understood, thanks.

Thanks Stephen and Doug,

It worked so well that I forgot that our tree participates in linux-next :)
I'll add you to rare emails like this:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-rdma&m=154391249623140&w=2

Thanks

>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 282 bytes --]

Hi Doug,

On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 20:33:08 -0500 Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> FWIW this will go away in a day or two.  I merged mlx5-next into rdma
> for-next in order to take a series that depended on it.

Understood, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Doug Ledford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1166 bytes --]

FWIW this will go away in a day or two.  I merged mlx5-next into rdma
for-next in order to take a series that depended on it.

On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 12:07 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Leon,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   36e235c88299 ("RDMA/mlx5: Use the uapi disablement APIs instead of code")
> 
> from the rdma tree and commit:
> 
>   81773ce5f07f ("RDMA/mlx5: Use stages for callback to setup and release DEVX")
> 
> from the mlx5-next 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.
> 
-- 
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
    GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
    Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B  1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2321 bytes --]

Hi Leon,

Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.h

between commit:

  36e235c88299 ("RDMA/mlx5: Use the uapi disablement APIs instead of code")

from the rdma tree and commit:

  81773ce5f07f ("RDMA/mlx5: Use stages for callback to setup and release DEVX")

from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
index f9078688da5b,96515a8c9d2c..000000000000
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
@@@ -6231,6 -6336,12 +6321,9 @@@ static const struct mlx5_ib_profile pf_
  	STAGE_CREATE(MLX5_IB_STAGE_PRE_IB_REG_UMR,
  		     NULL,
  		     mlx5_ib_stage_pre_ib_reg_umr_cleanup),
 -	STAGE_CREATE(MLX5_IB_STAGE_SPECS,
 -		     mlx5_ib_stage_populate_specs,
 -		     NULL),
+ 	STAGE_CREATE(MLX5_IB_STAGE_WHITELIST_UID,
+ 		     mlx5_ib_stage_devx_init,
+ 		     mlx5_ib_stage_devx_cleanup),
  	STAGE_CREATE(MLX5_IB_STAGE_IB_REG,
  		     mlx5_ib_stage_ib_reg_init,
  		     mlx5_ib_stage_ib_reg_cleanup),
diff --cc drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.h
index a2b35a1a5031,861b68f2e330..000000000000
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.h
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mlx5_ib.h
@@@ -781,6 -784,8 +784,7 @@@ enum mlx5_ib_stages 
  	MLX5_IB_STAGE_UAR,
  	MLX5_IB_STAGE_BFREG,
  	MLX5_IB_STAGE_PRE_IB_REG_UMR,
 -	MLX5_IB_STAGE_SPECS,
+ 	MLX5_IB_STAGE_WHITELIST_UID,
  	MLX5_IB_STAGE_IB_REG,
  	MLX5_IB_STAGE_POST_IB_REG_UMR,
  	MLX5_IB_STAGE_DELAY_DROP,
@@@ -890,7 -896,9 +895,8 @@@ struct mlx5_ib_pf_eq 
  
  struct mlx5_ib_dev {
  	struct ib_device		ib_dev;
 -	const struct uverbs_object_tree_def *driver_trees[7];
  	struct mlx5_core_dev		*mdev;
+ 	struct notifier_block		mdev_events;
  	struct mlx5_roce		roce[MLX5_MAX_PORTS];
  	int				num_ports;
  	/* serialize update of capability mask

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Leon Romanovsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 953 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:04:32AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Leon,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   9afc97c29b03 ("mlx5: remove support for ib_get_vector_affinity")
>
> from the rdma tree and commit:
>
>   f2f3df550139 ("net/mlx5: EQ, Privatize eq_table and friends")
>
> from the mlx5-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the former removed some of the code modified by 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.
>

Thanks Stephen,

You are absolutely right, the removal is correct.

>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 800 bytes --]

Hi Leon,

Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c

between commit:

  9afc97c29b03 ("mlx5: remove support for ib_get_vector_affinity")

from the rdma tree and commit:

  f2f3df550139 ("net/mlx5: EQ, Privatize eq_table and friends")

from the mlx5-next tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed some of the code modified by 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

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