[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250908175728.3001c2f4@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 17:57:28 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Miguel Ojeda
<ojeda@...nel.org>
Cc: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
<linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.se>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rust-alloc tree with the
mm-unstable tree and Linus' tree.
Hi all,
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 17:30:41 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rust-alloc tree got a conflict in:
>
> rust/kernel/alloc/allocator_test.rs
>
> between commits:
>
> 501046225a67 ("rust: alloc: fix missing import needed for `rusttest`")
> c8a3b6ec0370 ("rust: add support for NUMA ids in allocations")
>
> from the mm-unstable tree and
>
> 0f580d5d3d9d ("rust: alloc: fix `rusttest` by providing `Cmalloc::aligned_layout` too")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> fe927defbb4f ("rust: alloc: remove `allocator_test`")
>
> from the rust-alloc tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I removed the file) 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.
This is now a conflict between the rust tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists