Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the powerpc tree

[Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
>   arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   cee5405da402 ("powerpc/hotplug: Improve responsiveness of hotplug change")
>
> from the powerpc tree and commit:
>
>   df7e828c1b69 ("timer: Remove init_timer_deferrable() in favor of timer_setup()")
>
> from the tip 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/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> index eb604b3574fa,73016451f330..000000000000
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> @@@ -1506,9 -1466,7 +1505,7 @@@ static struct timer_list topology_timer
>
>   static void reset_topology_timer(void)
>   {
> -       topology_timer.data = 0;
> -       topology_timer.expires = jiffies + topology_timer_secs * HZ;
> -       mod_timer(&topology_timer, topology_timer.expires);
>  -      mod_timer(&topology_timer, jiffies + 60 * HZ);
> ++      mod_timer(&topology_timer, jiffies + topology_timer_secs * HZ);
>   }
>
>   #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> @@@ -1561,13 -1520,14 +1558,14 @@@ int start_topology_update(void
>                         rc = of_reconfig_notifier_register(&dt_update_nb);
>   #endif
>                 }
>  -      } else if (firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_VPHN) &&
>  +      }
>  +      if (firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_VPHN) &&
>                    lppaca_shared_proc(get_lppaca())) {
>                 if (!vphn_enabled) {
>  -                      prrn_enabled = 0;
>                         vphn_enabled = 1;
>                         setup_cpu_associativity_change_counters();
> -                       init_timer_deferrable(&topology_timer);
> +                       timer_setup(&topology_timer, topology_timer_fn,
> +                                   TIMER_DEFERRABLE);
>                         reset_topology_timer();
>                 }
>         }

Thanks, this looks correct to me!

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security