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,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 ADFBCC4727D for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:11:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 574E122208 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:11:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="vkkvgYxd" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728119AbgIXOLL (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:11:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55144 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727980AbgIXOLL (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:11:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x643.google.com (mail-ej1-x643.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::643]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC533C0613CE for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x643.google.com with SMTP id j11so4758967ejk.0 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:11:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mH5/aIS5YG9tOp7sPXvPGy8zU6r6nGJSNmkQ/FEJOWY=; b=vkkvgYxdtsCvsj2rzgp77iRI5xBNWFMT+39Fh2AZbQ8/6sD5hqc8CpyWI/Dto5rCNh /kq2tHOUXhhMDb2tWfX7ynkCR5SfoyVjLWebipEITs6QqjnwnYIZ+vywydafb11sIcvS OjQWSShGtqMI0tX7Zi9TeDMyVudeBSAah8npe/2e4ZzK6faFOqGQB3iLQHlnDUJiNblG iTCJEz88Trw7FjTrpIBNYid4UUZcQlikEwC686DEEKxt87laJrC+cTfiUt2PuSNDxejQ 5RocSmWmdIkI7ehx1qnOd9EfqSsa6HDg1EnbPRpZQcOe6jXybBdr+uzTAW7krRIf5Wsd wjnQ== 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=mH5/aIS5YG9tOp7sPXvPGy8zU6r6nGJSNmkQ/FEJOWY=; b=ntnXXr3Fq4mJ0oXpc7ZuNVhXQJcmAlyWE+i+vWKCJRR2xuGEOZU/JneVdi7gANAWgl 3t4p0+E2/mqAuep0Vw/36zZiY5gWjZL2CBCzENehZhbIIxG9NgwTvZRCkcZx7J/Ls1Io iOOBYyDDKu+SK0OXAevUfnUmcNfqAqNaVY1n4+d55S0LrFtTw32uW+UujcJMIa2Fg+LJ XVs04GpCT7Ow9dPAzg4CS3u6iR35ipK/khbcR0dUqnxVEIQ6Qjce+e5Daxg5Ehsa6CjX QeAtETgzNswqDQTlicbGZYSnuuGHpe8lPUnIKmmNLEUyC68/B+tR3Ah4ENBMeuf6juGW +evA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532XGpyX6lykuEfM/oAuPvdfufIvKomwaSiWUfi6xwCWutzEv9wb gCuWrxR3kFOgUA+nvU2PG0yJcfO+oGiLINyp1W9o8A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw0A0g1P9UoaH9Uodm0ZSqEOlzXmZyvpfin9HA5QaoqGIV8Vr74pks2pjZN02Kb2L4x3cF6ZyY1S1shEVFBVLo= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:14c9:: with SMTP id y9mr31302ejc.523.1600956669438; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:11:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200924164529.61ea980f@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20200924164529.61ea980f@canb.auug.org.au> From: Dan Williams Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:10:58 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the vfs tree To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Al Viro , Josh Poimboeuf , Vishal Verma , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:45 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the nvdimm tree got a conflict in: > > lib/iov_iter.c > > between commit: > > e33ea6e5ba6a ("x86/uaccess: Use pointer masking to limit uaccess speculation") > > from the vfs tree and commit: > > 0a78de3d4b7b ("x86, powerpc: Rename memcpy_mcsafe() to copy_mc_to_{user, kernel}()") > > from the nvdimm tree. > > I fixed it up (I just used the latter, but I suspect that more work is > needed) 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. I messed up, this shouldn't be present in -next, yet. Will remove.