[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b8c2663b-69df-913f-8da1-de6b7bd189ce@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 09:22:04 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the risc-v tree
On 1/17/22 05:13, Anup Patel wrote:
> The commit c62a76859723 ("RISC-V: KVM: Add SBI v0.2 base extension")
> is already merged in Linus' tree.
>
> Since you are yet to send PR for 5.17, we have two options:
> 1) Rebase your for-next branch upon latest Linus' tree master branch
> 2) Send "RISC-V: Use SBI SRST extension when available" in the
> next batch of changes for 5.17 after 5.17-rc1
>
> Let me know if you want me to rebase and send v8 patch of
> "RISC-V: Use SBI SRST extension when available"
>
> In future, we should coordinate and use a shared tag for such
> conflicting changes.
Palmer should just send it to Linus and note "enum sbi_ext_id has a
trivial conflict" in the pull request message.
We'll sort it out better in the future, but it's such a minor conflict
that it is not even a nuisance.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists