[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2gLDw8rOYPgg=-hnNcK_5NW-fGHmiJ3ntb0dbf1EjQOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:02:43 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with the asm-generic tree
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:52 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h
>
> between commit:
>
> f911c2a7c096 ("arm64: use asm-generic/mmu_context.h for no-op implementations")
>
> from the asm-generic tree and commit:
>
> 48118151d8cc ("arm64: mm: Pin down ASIDs for sharing mm with devices")
>
> from the arm64 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.
>
Sorry about that, I had pushed my asm-generic branch to the correct
location on Friday after I noticed it was missing. Removed it again now
until the end up the merge window.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists