[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87h8cwpl3t.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 14:17:58 +1100
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the swiotlb tree with the powerpc tree
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the swiotlb tree got a conflict in:
>
> kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
>
> between commit:
>
> feee96440c9c ("swiotlb: remove swiotlb_dma_supported")
>
> from the powerpc tree and commit:
>
> 71602fe6d4e9 ("swiotlb: add debugfs to track swiotlb buffer usage")
>
> from the swiotlb 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.
OK thanks. That looks pretty harmless as far as conflicts go.
cheers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists