From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48C412C68C; Thu, 16 May 2024 23:42:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715902946; cv=none; b=EFZ1giD3JNo4B7pGx8ILQP1IQeRibCO8O/DnsiOyNDb2BmGQQPSWKLFH5vqQ6WyEdt1xLSW6BaC2+w+JPefI62Id72muqmZpi+wtdRIhHtxwAwJCh79zJSEnYvgcyyCTPjdF8epi3JxGgD1AXK8P8dwUbRdf5AdSETyUzXt4Z6I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715902946; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zee7hHQpdOGP25NMSwoAHBhZF/iEgJc6wzU+KTUZfdY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LEXqv8+HvVjq0ODoEHB6NLxcQoo9Z5dkec2YG1h2ufAr0jHDwWwXRk1LQ3ebz+FGkMu/QtoKViRXlHSEIEc0cUOur4AzBzaNR8Rr4HFByr8A0hj8lx/w3Vs4rIs5Y3MMIYUj82/Q6596nFUY6FtcvlJQfCjNImW0W0iK4Oo22y8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b=ojWbBU0O; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="ojWbBU0O" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1715902940; bh=XSBc8fMaGGaZPXxCyzrlLuxfz7M3VRz50PHtt0uz3jw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ojWbBU0OOadLF9W6zwZSKJqNs+qQWVf5jYFvGV99pevivf81EmEIq8CHAsWs47zGI bEIeU5O8qAw2d7L+UHNrkPYTwTBxZpR4bSMmwfvgRl7YXPRRi5zqpFg1DgNXWhHO1C SQyUP5ZE6D91caUVya1WsmvHq3jL/l8f7zbBLxfEP11CTn4qFLr5BIZjZ+BvxER2oE lgMjgWQiQ/nMNA2L75Dj5gWF5UK/76qXlX5tMcYtQwnT5ex0G4ftrZlmznfvTr96S4 fbvmXeKgqijqzyrKU8x2R+FGK1B559462dhBuerhIO9TOeJSkSXVUhggmh692DKr0e W11pnD5XeDJNA== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4VgRTR70f5z4wbr; Fri, 17 May 2024 09:42:19 +1000 (AEST) Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 09:42:19 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Huacai Chen Cc: Paolo Bonzini , KVM , Bibo Mao , Huacai Chen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Tiezhu Yang Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the loongarch tree Message-ID: <20240517094219.6a4f618a@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20240515125404.5ffbaada@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20240515125404.5ffbaada@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/o=RVMbxBToyvQbtEwVMaoE1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 --Sig_/o=RVMbxBToyvQbtEwVMaoE1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Wed, 15 May 2024 12:54:04 +1000 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: >=20 > arch/loongarch/kernel/irq.c >=20 > between commit: >=20 > 5685d7fcb55f ("LoongArch: Give a chance to build with !CONFIG_SMP") >=20 > from the loongarch tree and commit: >=20 > 316863cb62fe ("LoongArch/smp: Refine some ipi functions on LoongArch pl= atform") >=20 > from the kvm tree. >=20 > I fixed it up (the latter removed a function that was made protected by > CONFIG_SMP in the former - I just removed it) 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. This is now a conflict between the loongarch tree and Linus' tree. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/o=RVMbxBToyvQbtEwVMaoE1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmZGmdsACgkQAVBC80lX 0GyYnggAoHkAcH1yudrcWWYykKNdOiAPmChnPhT34hThPHbuuo2Eo6V+OC7Ks6eO F2v0+KrTyZJYRjxAHSeEDuT1SlZxax9hRYOH2JV1ugK2HXeAuxQY4u3HTfiIIP28 G4F3KLZpQfrFsoAkhfb/8wDyB/YvohpsiBfVEkerVZoKqNQUGUhODIa0gPvSSZLc 3vlXNIJwKaNigl2FDGtcsLMmZTNce9F/qo4ya2S99jtYlMaxRcz1BTk7GdmZcKPx TN1AuGrQXDcWmutcc/0Rc2zFc6InBu0JOZDXLCrLWuiAZcrFLydrGknIXomraF1O edm8Ww9lQNy2dS6auN9I7ocR+6FPZQ== =Twam -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/o=RVMbxBToyvQbtEwVMaoE1--