[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250509162901.79e269a5@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2025 16:29:01 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "H.
Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>, Linux
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
<linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Srinivas Pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the tip tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the drivers-x86 tree got a conflict in:
drivers/platform/x86/intel/speed_select_if/isst_if_common.c
between commit:
6fa17efe4544 ("x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl_safe()' to 'wrmsrq_safe()'")
from the tip tree and commit:
c935ddfe65da ("platform/x86: ISST: Do Not Restore SST MSRs on CPU Online Operation")
from the drivers-x86 tree.
I fixed it up (the latter removed the code that the former updated) 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.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists