[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190702040305.GO4727@mtr-leonro.mtl.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:03:05 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
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>,
Eli Britstein <elibr@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Bodong Wang <bodong@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with Linus' tree
On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 01:13:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eswitch_offloads.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 955858009708 ("net/mlx5e: Fix number of vports for ingress ACL configuration")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 062f4bf4aab5 ("net/mlx5: E-Switch, Consolidate eswitch function number of VFs")
>
> from the mlx5-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the latter 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.
Thanks Stephen,
I expect this conflict will vanish once both rdma and netdev pull
mlx5-next branch, which is based on -rc2.
Thanks
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Powered by blists - more mailing lists