From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751356AbeAPEvE (ORCPT + 1 other); Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:51:04 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:41549 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750903AbeAPEvD (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:51:03 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:51:00 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Andrew Morton , David Miller , Networking Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ido Schimmel , Emil S Tantilov , David Ahern Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree Message-ID: <20180116155100.3ac44bf1@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 Return-Path: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: net/ipv6/route.c between commit: 6802f3adcb3f ("ipv6: Fix build with gcc-4.4.5") from the net-next tree and patch: "net/ipv6/route.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 anon union initializer issue" from the akpm tree. I fixed it up (I just used the net-next tree 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