linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the drm-msm tree with the drm 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:10:32 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-msm tree with the drm tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-msm tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c

between commit:

  0e10e9a1db23 ("drm/sched: drop entity parameter from drm_sched_push_job")

from the drm tree and commit:

  68002469e571 ("drm/msm: One sched entity per process per priority")

from the drm-msm tree.

The conflict was this:

        /* The scheduler owns a ref now: */
        msm_gem_submit_get(submit);

<<<<<<< HEAD
        drm_sched_entity_push_job(&submit->base);
======= 
        drm_sched_entity_push_job(&submit->base, queue->entity);
>>>>>>> drm-msm/msm-next

        args->fence = submit->fence_id;

I fixed it up (I just used the HEAD 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

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped