[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4dbc5e97-2577-d3b7-466c-24cba3a3fdca@de.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 08:47:22 +0200
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Harald Freudenberger <freude@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Jason J. Herne" <jjherne@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the s390 tree
On 04/27/2017 05:29 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 985a9d20daa6 ("s390/crypto: Renaming PPNO to PRNO.")
>
> from the s390 tree and commit:
>
> 152c1c8d60eb ("s390/cpacf: Introduce kma instruction")
>
> from the kvms390 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.
>
Correct fix, thanks. It should be ok again tomorrow as Martin has merged
my topic branch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists