[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181219151252.3e27a7f8@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:12:52 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Marc Orr <marcorr@...gle.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
between commit:
eb012ef3b4e3 ("x86: Remove Intel MPX")
from the tip tree and commit:
b666a4b69739 ("kvm: x86: Dynamically allocate guest_fpu")
from the kvm tree.
I fixed it up (the former removed some code updated by the latter, so I
did that) 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.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists