[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DC1661RBEB1Q.1Y748EK7YML1Y@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 10:50:11 +0200
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Simona Vetter"
<simona.vetter@...ll.ch>, "Vitaly Wool" <vitaly.wool@...sulko.se>, "Intel
Graphics" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, "DRI"
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.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 mm-unstable tree with the
drm-misc-fixes tree
On Wed Aug 13, 2025 at 3:11 AM CEST, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mm-unstable tree got a conflict in:
>
> rust/kernel/alloc/allocator.rs
>
> between commit:
>
> fde578c86281 ("rust: alloc: replace aligned_size() with Kmalloc::aligned_layout()")
>
> from the drm-misc-fixes tree and commit:
>
> cda097b07bce ("rust: support large alignments in allocations")
>
> from the mm-unstable 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.
Thanks, the resolution looks good!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists