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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 6EE97C433EF for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 02:56:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5632760F22 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 02:56:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239153AbhIFC5Y (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Sep 2021 22:57:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45712 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239103AbhIFC5R (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Sep 2021 22:57:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x634.google.com (mail-ej1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::634]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B39DDC061757 for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2021 19:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x634.google.com with SMTP id bt14so10515981ejb.3 for ; Sun, 05 Sep 2021 19:56:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bytedance-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xydTELVR03F9tNIX3znu9/l3opgVjN88wKbMkJ2pBWc=; b=mc7XwRV4yCqZumKavNPxeFi83P8NsgpgvvJDzVTcs9Z5yXGO/Vw1sVK4ZJtvDRyj7T fQhfqT3vmOy/ZhUZyNk16b756D71A0XikEhgNYbCNJ0NpwhV2cUmZ6jHIzcljk2D/Lco j/Vp9xSzttiCMrrnLPxl+a65f9Ff+pMRV/50ahiGHlL9oWz+BkFWEk0VgrralmKUfv5p dCpMGPWvjRUQPLtHCIpbCmh49wW/lQlFEItmC/HhxNG6JawQfkdh7xkdjyyXBI8+L42F h8X/mlZ2rq/WdUM6tF0kWcr9UeamosVqFn4ZG35WYHqY29aMoeMAyYU1NXWYuSeCTt3H Txgg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xydTELVR03F9tNIX3znu9/l3opgVjN88wKbMkJ2pBWc=; b=YWENxEd8WaEOaTdi1k/U2yCgViXNPmH0k6K49A2p6gTXbvX1sqRVngmkrTpE8AGsww C9/ZodsW/82kS9tXyxto1idKIdE2KoZLBHclx01MRNpOnwI9kffEVql0dXI3BU41MTyI DWqm2Har79BHqmyPPqOwYVRkklxNsdMbbDctyCct4F3eHc/sM3CFgeb7AqY/q5RIAnod ZtD272OMo+SJlg6JUYirN+vvlxArfRh2DzyX6Revf7YEwebDjdnf4UbtpPGnBlY8J09Y lSdMn+Yi2BMgd2U+VlXhNGPpjiB6COyUCPtwWj6C7L5Y9K3d7nPGZcYsCNQAeXThk924 LTNg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531JHthg0jEliGeKJHRe3xeonvCO8thvqzwoKOtTVos1OPAi7AFR 11kXnSRqMF5YOBY43h6JtEY5MmEKSpIYv6K+HNSD X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw9x3aDTVS//sOMbtlZpo1q7ugoS/hhYsH1jXghmXtpak3tQCvrftpkW10JUbbk5PmlDcqgWKP0//lRo1giuOE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:cecd:: with SMTP id si13mr11577549ejb.93.1630896972285; Sun, 05 Sep 2021 19:56:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210906122806.2ca7e715@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20210906122806.2ca7e715@canb.auug.org.au> From: Yongji Xie Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:56:01 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vhost tree with Linus' tree To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Thomas Gleixner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:28 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the vhost tree got a conflict in: > > fs/eventfd.c > > between commit: > > b542e383d8c0 ("eventfd: Make signal recursion protection a task bit") > > from Linus' tree and commit: > > 0afdb2abbff3 ("eventfd: Export eventfd_wake_count to modules") > > from the vhost tree. > > I fixed it up (I removed eventfd_wake_count as I could not see any added > use for it) 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. > Yes, I think we can safely remove the commit 0afdb2abbff3 ("eventfd: Export eventfd_wake_count to modules") after the commit b542e383d8c0 applied. Thanks, Yongji