Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 tree

From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Christoffer Dall <cdall@cs.columbia.edu>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 tree
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 09:32:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZIrMrHt8IpUKL8DG@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZIq/s8p10EGI9fqu@linux.dev>

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 07:37:23AM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 12:45:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   arch/arm64/kernel/kaslr.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   6e13b6b923b3 ("arm64: kaslr: split kaslr/module initialization")
> >   e46b7103aef3 ("arm64: module: move module randomization to module.c")
> > 
> > from the arm64 tree and commit:
> > 
> >   0ddc312b7c73 ("arm64: Turn kaslr_feature_override into a generic SW feature override")
> > 
> > from the kvm-arm 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.
> 
> Diff LGTM, thanks Stephen.
> 
> Catalin, I'd like to resolve this in the kvmarm tree and merge
> for-next/module-alloc. You alright with that?

Yes, feel free to pull that into your tree.

-- 
Catalin