Messages in this thread | | | From | "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <> | Subject | RE: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the dma-mapping tree | Date | Wed, 16 Sep 2020 04:22:03 +0000 |
| |
> -----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
| |