[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zi9iEVnhGqjxikU_@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 12:02:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommu tree with the pm tree
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 02:07:27PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the iommu tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/acpi/scan.c
>
> between commit:
>
> e80d4122df9c ("ACPI: scan: Move misleading comment to acpi_dma_configure_id()")
>
> from the pm tree and commit:
>
> f091e93306e0 ("dma-mapping: Simplify arch_setup_dma_ops()")
>
> from the iommu tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter removed the comment updated by the former, so
> I just used the latter 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.
To me it looks like the correct fix, thank you!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists