[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B66F752.1070001@windriver.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 09:46:26 -0600
From: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the kgdb tree
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/kernel/kgdb.c between commit
> 53a2aa296b5108e9bfdcda7f41221e721d9c7474 ("x86,hw_breakpoint,kgdb: kgdb
> to use hw_breakpoint API") from the kgdb tree and commit
> cc0967490c1c3824bc5b75718b6ca8a51d9f2617 ("x86, hw_breakpoints, kgdb: Fix
> kgdb to use hw_breakpoint API") from the tip tree.
>
> These two commits are similar but sufficiently different to make a mess.
> I effectively reverted the kgdb tree version and used the tip tree
> version. This also involved reverting the kgdb tree changes to
> arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c. I hope I got it right (since I had to
> reapply a few other kgdb changes by hand) (an x86_64 allmodconfig build
> produces no new warnings or errors, so I have some hope).
>
> Someone should give me some guidance as to a way forward here, please.
>
>
What is in tip is the correct version.
It is the age old time dependency of who updates whose tree first, vs
when the linux-next merge runs. At any rate this is already resolved.
Thanks,
Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists