[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170926032628.GT3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 20:26:28 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 01:00:18PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in:
>
> kernel/rcu/tree.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 28585a832602 ("rcu: Allow for page faults in NMI handlers")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 3e2baa988b9c ("rcu: Allow for page faults in NMI handlers")
>
> from the rcu tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the rcu tree version) 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.
Hello, Stephen,
This conflict will disappear tomorrow, as I have merged the commit
from Linus's tree in place of mine and have added another commit that
removes the READ_ONCE()s. Same result, but no conflict. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists