From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB21C4360C for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:44:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D950D208C3 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:44:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ffwll.ch header.i=@ffwll.ch header.b="AfuUb30B" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1733125AbfJJNow (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:44:52 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f45.google.com ([209.85.208.45]:37825 "EHLO mail-ed1-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387460AbfJJNoi (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:44:38 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f45.google.com with SMTP id r4so5520680edy.4 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:44:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ffwll.ch; s=google; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=hoJ6TorxaA0ueOkAnVcY7UKvB59REF8/krI4QbdE3rY=; b=AfuUb30BN2fwLHvc++JsHy0F39WOPWyY6n5BemTQw4OffXIs9XPV8OEKc91w7W4+g5 hrlPzv1yXu60ZCX+CWlLe8CNYfo2zJTFzNtQS/MD5/GwzPcnvFN3neUhaveUI3Q8qoVC VH1RNyOOxQ0acee6EjhlHOvgQbsStXwga5L2c= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=hoJ6TorxaA0ueOkAnVcY7UKvB59REF8/krI4QbdE3rY=; b=R98P5QQr0z3xVVMUJCBjlip/GQHpDpnmLRw9HEFFN1AX01UQKwHDNWa41AtQvkpuA3 TsgklcbAURSammqgHxKF+P2I4j+UgkBC/N23o/DIfdHVK40yirRK3h4qFGljxdltwwWS YCZrQ/Qvg/wqTDB6gXYf8jpTD/JKD+xM49k9f9OC4gVgrLxM/VLJOj4AXP5FSgDzAZzB X7qhqBpq4i1WFUmDcyhPKJtORUA4Li0KFpT5JbJXKJplYbIJW7RCXMIw2ha6e5EKSxSG fNrhevbBLQLgY+HQn3KLJhdCQmvgBJDJZb1jr4FNzFJwJw4y2WhhGeRgtqsCnCW2nFVi VH/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXOSbPBlqtKqHeiFWMF2zdD2CFUL3fu2rDFENhGA6onX9dql2mo oj2fb2DB83xqdx6x3RiRcs0jDA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzHiMfMRhzP+ce4ioVGwJmdp6neoxytw+JQPQJ8tg7kmLQo7v1y826ew96r7MuwZnWxO0ymAA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a986:: with SMTP id jr6mr7585993ejb.158.1570715076498; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:44:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phenom.ffwll.local (212-51-149-96.fiber7.init7.net. [212.51.149.96]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r18sm974451edx.94.2019.10.10.06.44.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:44:33 +0200 From: Daniel Vetter To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , Dave Airlie , Linux Next Mailing List , Qian Cai , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree Message-ID: <20191010134433.GY16989@phenom.ffwll.local> Mail-Followup-To: Stephen Rothwell , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DRI , Dave Airlie , Linux Next Mailing List , Qian Cai , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar References: <20191010131448.482da2b2@canb.auug.org.au> <20191010080207.GA22099@gmail.com> <20191010222210.1365d50b@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191010222210.1365d50b@canb.auug.org.au> X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 5.2.0-2-amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:23:21PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 10:02:07 +0200 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > I suspect -next will have to carry this semantic merge conflict > > resolution until the DRM tree is merged upstream. > > Yep, its not a real problem, I get a few like this every cycle. Yeah totally within expectations when I acked that cleanup patch. We'll probably have a few more lockdep annotation patches/changes that will conflict in drm. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch