linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the xen-arm tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130430091845.27d8de4935bd33ddb4a3e8c0@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:18:45 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the xen-arm
 tree

Hi Stefano,

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:50:22 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:54:26AM +0100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the arm-soc tree got a conflict in
> > > arch/arm/mach-virt/platsmp.c between commit fe4bff02886b ("arm: introduce
> > > psci_smp_ops") from the xen-arm tree and commit c0114709ed85 ("irqchip:
> > > gic: Perform the gic_secondary_init() call via CPU notifier") from the
> > > arm-soc tree.
> > > 
> > > The former renamed the file (and contents) so I applied the following
> > > patch and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
> > > 
> > > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> > > Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:52:27 +1000
> > > Subject: [PATCH] arm: fix for Perform the gic_secondary_init() call via CPU
> > >  notifier
> > > 
> > > due to code movement.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c | 7 -------
> > >  1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c
> > > index 6ef139d..cd9acc7 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c
> > > @@ -14,7 +14,6 @@
> > >   */
> > >  
> > >  #include <linux/init.h>
> > > -#include <linux/irqchip/arm-gic.h>
> > >  #include <linux/smp.h>
> > >  #include <linux/of.h>
> > >  
> > > @@ -55,11 +54,6 @@ static int __cpuinit psci_boot_secondary(unsigned int cpu,
> > >  	return -ENODEV;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -static void __cpuinit psci_secondary_init(unsigned int cpu)
> > > -{
> > > -	gic_secondary_init(0);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> > >  void __ref psci_cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
> > >  {
> > > @@ -84,7 +78,6 @@ bool __init psci_smp_available(void)
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  struct smp_operations __initdata psci_smp_ops = {
> > > -	.smp_secondary_init	= psci_secondary_init,
> > >  	.smp_boot_secondary	= psci_boot_secondary,
> > >  	.cpu_die		= psci_cpu_die,
> > >  };
> > 
> > The fix looks fine. Thanks.
> 
> Indeed, thanks! I'll add to it to the tree.

You should not apply that to your tree as you don't have the rest of the
change from the arm-soc tree.  It needs to be applied to the merge of the
two trees i.e. when Linus merges the last of the two trees.

This is why I wrote "no action is required".

And you committed it to your tree without your Signed-off-by ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped