[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190708160858.GI23966@mellanox.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 16:09:03 +0000
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree
On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 01:28:37PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 12:47:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/cq.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > e39afe3d6dbd ("RDMA: Convert CQ allocations to be under core responsibility")
> >
> > from the rdma tree and commit:
> >
> > 38164b771947 ("net/mlx5: mlx5_core_create_cq() enhancements")
> >
> > from the mlx5-next 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.
> >
>
> This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.
You'll see the mlx5-next merge with rdma tomorrow that will take care
of this
Thanks,
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists