[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191127073019.41c44ae7@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:30:19 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Cc: Christoffer Dall <cdall@...columbia.edu>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the kbuild
tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 13:58:11 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 14:38:42 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > include/Kbuild
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > fcbb8461fd23 ("kbuild: remove header compile test")
> >
> > from the kbuild tree and commit:
> >
> > 55009c6ed2d2 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Factor out hypercall handling from PSCI code")
> >
> > from the kvm-arm tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I just removed the file) 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 kvm tree and the kbuild tree.
And now between the kbuild tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists