[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191118150858.1a436a12@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 15:08:58 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.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>,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the workqueues tree with the tip tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the workqueues tree got a conflict in:
kernel/workqueue.c
between commit:
5a6446626d7e ("workqueue: Convert for_each_wq to use built-in list check")
from the tip tree and commit:
49e9d1a9faf2 ("workqueue: Add RCU annotation for pwq list walk")
from the workqueues tree.
I fixed it up (I just used the former as it is a superset of 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.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists