From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tang Chen Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the tip tree Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 14:34:32 +0800 Message-ID: <52CB9FF8.6020809@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <20140107170041.3a0b3ada016d250b1f9f0572@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140107170041.3a0b3ada016d250b1f9f0572@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lans Zhang , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Lai Jiangshan , Jiang Liu , Zhang Yanfei List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On 01/07/2014 02:00 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in > arch/x86/mm/numa.c between commit f3d815cb854b ("x86/mm/numa: Fix 32-bit > kernel NUMA boot") from the tip tree and commit 1459be89954e ("x86: get > pg_data_t's memory from other node") from the akpm-current tree. > > These appear to be two very similar solutions, I fixed it up (see below - > I (arbitrarily) chose to keep the actual allocation from the tip tree, but > the messages from the akpm-current tree) and can carry the fix as > necessary (no action is required). > memblock_alloc_nid() and __memblock_alloc_base() will call memblock_alloc_base_nid() in the end. So I think it is OK to me. I will do some tests when they are merged. Thanks.