linux-kernel - RE: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the dma-mapping tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 16 Sep 2020 04:22:03 +0000
From:   "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the
 dma-mapping tree



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr@...b.auug.org.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 4:12 PM
> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>; Christoph Hellwig
> <hch@....de>
> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>; Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)
> <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>; Linux Next Mailing List
> <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>; Linux Kernel Mailing List
> <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
> Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the
> dma-mapping tree
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   mm/Kconfig
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   b7176c261cdb ("dma-contiguous: provide the ability to reserve per-numa
> CMA")
> 
> from the dma-mapping tree and commit:
> 
>   c999bd436fe9 ("mm/cma: make number of CMA areas dynamic, remove
> CONFIG_CMA_AREAS")
> 
> from the akpm-current tree.

I guess this is because Mike's patch was written on top of dma-mapping's next branch.
Will it be better to go through Christoph's 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.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell

Thanks
Barry