From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the cisco tree with the vfs tree
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 14:54:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190114225412.GD18707@fifo99.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190115093330.1cbb0625@canb.auug.org.au>
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 09:33:30AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 16:29:23 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the cisco tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > dcf8001d292b ("vfs: Suppress MS_* flag defs within the kernel unless explicitly enabled")
> >
> > from the vfs tree and commit:
> >
> > 2c070709ea75 ("This updates the x86 code to use the CONFIG_GENERIC_CMDLINE")
> >
> > from the cisco 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 arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > index e493202bf265,ee109f490b22..000000000000
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > @@@ -51,7 -51,7 +51,8 @@@
> > #include <linux/kvm_para.h>
> > #include <linux/dma-contiguous.h>
> > #include <xen/xen.h>
> > +#include <uapi/linux/mount.h>
> > + #include <linux/cmdline.h>
> >
> > #include <linux/errno.h>
> > #include <linux/kernel.h>
>
> This is now a conflict between the cicso tree and Linus' tree.
I did a rebase after your original made this. I'm not sure it's needed any
longer. However, I was planning to rebase my tree again on top of the latest
Linus tree. How would you like to proceed ?
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-14 23:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-02 6:29 linux-next: manual merge of the cisco tree with the vfs tree Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-14 22:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-14 22:54 ` Daniel Walker [this message]
2019-01-15 0:18 ` 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=20190114225412.GD18707@fifo99.com \
--to=dwalker@fifo99.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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).