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