lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the dma-mapping tree
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Rothwell [mailto:sfr@canb.auug.org.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 4:12 PM
> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>; Christoph Hellwig
> <hch@lst.de>
> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>; Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)
> <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>; Linux Next Mailing List
> <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>; Linux Kernel Mailing List
> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the
> dma-mapping tree
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>
> mm/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> b7176c261cdb ("dma-contiguous: provide the ability to reserve per-numa
> CMA")
>
> from the dma-mapping tree and commit:
>
> c999bd436fe9 ("mm/cma: make number of CMA areas dynamic, remove
> CONFIG_CMA_AREAS")
>
> from the akpm-current tree.

I guess this is because Mike's patch was written on top of dma-mapping's next branch.
Will it be better to go through Christoph's tree?
>
> I fixed it up (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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell

Thanks
Barry

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-16 06:23    [W:0.045 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site