[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160629054750.GA3458@osiris>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 07:47:50 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 02:36:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c
>
> between commit:
>
> e030c1125eab ("s390/hypfs: use basic block for diag inline assembly")
>
> from the s390 tree and commit:
>
> e65f30e0cb29 ("s390: hypfs: Move diag implementation and data definitions")
>
> from the kvm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (my fixup patch now looks like 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.
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:47:33 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] s390: merge fix up for __diag204 move
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> ---
> arch/s390/kernel/diag.c | 14 ++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
The fix looks good. Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists