[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y9nLwemhReecdLpr@ziepe.ca>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 22:17:37 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommu tree with the rdma-fixes
tree
On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 12:14:02PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the iommu tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_uiom.c
>
> between commit:
>
> b7e08a5a63a1 ("RDMA/usnic: use iommu_map_atomic() under spin_lock()")
>
> from the rdma-fixes tree and commits:
>
> 1369459b2e21 ("iommu: Add a gfp parameter to iommu_map()")
> 4dc6376af596 ("iommu: Remove iommu_map_atomic()")
>
> from the iommu 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.
Looks good thank you
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists