[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190222124946.GA29125@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 13:49:46 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the
dma-mapping tree
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:43:41PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > cfced786969c ("dma-mapping: remove the default map_resource implementation")
> >
> > from the dma-mapping tree and commit:
> >
> > 68005b67d15a ("powerpc/dma: use the generic direct mapping bypass")
> >
> > from the powerpc tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I just used the latter) 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.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Christoph, I've put the powerpc dma changes in a topic branch if you
> want to merge it to reduce the conflicts. Up to you.
Thanks. I think the conflicts are pretty harmless as we are mostly
removing code entirely in the powerpc tree that the dma-mapping tree
touches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists