[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABgObfaDQMxj9CZBzea+=1fcFQXEemAJoH5Jvc9+tfiC7NAvrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 11:42:01 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>, Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@...nel.org>,
Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>,
DRM XE List <intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the drm-xe tree
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 4:58 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.orgau> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> include/linux/bits.h
>
> between commits:
>
> b77cb9640f1f ("bits: introduce fixed-type genmasks")
> 34b80df456ca ("bits: Introduce fixed-type BIT")
>
> from the drm-xe tree and commit:
>
> 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK")
>
> from the kvm 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.
Lucas, Oded, Thomas,
do you have a topic branch that I can merge?
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists