[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aIiABxMGqYg2bGZ5@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2025 11:02:15 +0300
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.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 paulmck tree with the
mm-nonmm-unstable tree
Hi Stephen,
On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 09:28:08PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 10:42:45AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the paulmck tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > lib/Kconfig.debug
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > c2d288f7ab13 ("kho: add test for kexec handover")
> >
> > from the mm-nonmm-unstable tree and commit:
> >
> > d19e9fa61f60 ("lib: Add trivial kunit test for ratelimit")
> >
> > from the paulmck 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.
>
> Thank you, and this looks plausible to me.
>
> There is an extra blank line, but worse things could happen.
Yeah, what Paul said :)
> Thanx, Paul
>
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Stephen Rothwell
> >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists