From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751955AbcLEGIy (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:08:54 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:49029 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751892AbcLEGIu (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:08:50 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 17:08:48 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with Linus' tree Message-ID: <20161205170848.6952c08f@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20161205055655.GB30758@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20161205163808.6d3918b6@canb.auug.org.au> <20161205055655.GB30758@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Michal, On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 06:56:56 +0100 Michal Hocko wrote: > > FWIW this resolution is correct Thanks, good to know. > > 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. > > Sorry about that, I haven't noticed the conflict. No worries, that is what I am here for :-) -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell