[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220324182956.2b47b244@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 18:29:56 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the arm64 tree
Hi all,
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:03:54 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/um/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> b62a8486de3a ("elfcore: Replace CONFIG_{IA64, UML} checks with a new option")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> 6692531df62d ("uml/x86: use x86 load_unaligned_zeropad()")
>
> from the vfs 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.
>
>
> diff --cc arch/x86/um/Kconfig
> index ead7e5b3a975,4eb47d3ba625..000000000000
> --- a/arch/x86/um/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/um/Kconfig
> @@@ -8,7 -8,7 +8,8 @@@ endmen
>
> config UML_X86
> def_bool y
> + select ARCH_BINFMT_ELF_EXTRA_PHDRS if X86_32
> + select DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS
>
> config 64BIT
> bool "64-bit kernel" if "$(SUBARCH)" = "x86"
This is now a conflict between the vfs tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists