From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757127AbdKOEgP (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:36:15 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:58641 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756129AbdKOEfm (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:35:42 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:35:39 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Frederic Weisbecker , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the rseq tree with Linus' tree Message-ID: <20171115153539.77e27249@canb.auug.org.au> 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 Mathieu, Today's linux-next merge of the rseq tree got a conflict in: kernel/sched/core.c between commit: 7863406143d8 ("sched/isolation: Move housekeeping related code to its own file") from Linus' tree and commit: 533bd7403b04 ("x86: Introduce sync_core_before_usermode (v2)") from the rseq 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. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell diff --cc kernel/sched/core.c index c85dfb746f8c,43099a091742..000000000000 --- a/kernel/sched/core.c +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c @@@ -27,7 -26,7 +27,8 @@@ #include #include #include +#include + #include #include #include