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 7FEEE305953; Thu, 4 Dec 2025 05:56:12 +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=1764827775; cv=none; b=PqeSCuFSlvdFQspIleQMOfZyiWxer2Kula6DvwlXI+WKsKamVd+ca7p6XOgzboaNpj+TDlWPG28voyVmJAWKa0FxJMRZK6+Cqf2xeibKeLe+Ak5/Cu1cGs5MdD9Pe/PpSSu6JOa0Rdh+RAIm55o4BDEh3sRbW5vwQdEK7DtWTsg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764827775; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZS9Ihwd5iNKQeB/u5qMZt9tIe9qxWNYbV3p5HLN7R4A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=D0XeMgMV3ifSIG9dSd8LO0MfTh5p1ayUu+tMzlaHKE76YPZKrzQVp+WzvA8luSE/x1KYlh9vaMf6n+sBVUqpuU1yctKR0nGuiJhVSGT35QokS/19ZasSNjPse/JyC/uiwGbtTKuyRXj3r2Lk/hsZnExXIXwKxN6bfj4kRr3/D2k= 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=GZgZ/iXP; 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="GZgZ/iXP" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=202503; t=1764827770; bh=MK92OjQK4HEi4uo71eaKwfQe+Si+0CxR7MQHlY+4nio=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=GZgZ/iXPynXxDPMw+hu7fQsOQdo3Yl6t2gfK7d8XXRPIfkXZqynFGhl41zyKlrDg8 Ql9p3GQbrlJYsg6aIVrJOej2Vzx1o+GGY7h5Zm9BbQrMu6w0ELVTvUIyWEUDEWv3Km euh3oXKkv6MOhgOWVmIgYG485deqTnXRwoY0s8gd9FfrsNwAGZqVy2bt+AZkwicxzN ITlWJGP93Jw8n4wgheUaxRL1TsdhMfLoXIheD5heAlfP+DIWg56duYT7/HRt+gDCZO KyRi4Mk0/tShKUkayLjPnibYP17qLcDyfV35z5aal3dG6ABG6Jykafn5s2UOwi9Khx r+tera/JuX49Q== 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 secp256r1 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4dMNzZ2qLfz4wDR; Thu, 04 Dec 2025 16:56:09 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 16:56:09 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Andrew Morton , Chaitanya S Prakash , Linu Cherian , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with the mm-unstable tree Message-ID: <20251204165609.11bd70d4@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <90164a38-2aa5-4d3d-85b3-29a9a8b6d9b7@arm.com> References: <20251114112144.366698c7@canb.auug.org.au> <20251204130051.30f0604b@canb.auug.org.au> <90164a38-2aa5-4d3d-85b3-29a9a8b6d9b7@arm.com> 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_/dX3c+O5/3DOQOwDEjJtIqhv"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 --Sig_/dX3c+O5/3DOQOwDEjJtIqhv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Anshuman, On Thu, 4 Dec 2025 08:55:54 +0530 Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > On 04/12/25 7:30 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > >=20 > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2025 11:21:44 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: =20 > >> > >> Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in: > >> > >> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c > >> > >> between commit: > >> > >> 2b9cdb805fcd ("mm: make INVALID_PHYS_ADDR a generic macro") > >> > >> from the mm-unstable tree and commit: > >> > >> bfc184cb1ba7 ("arm64/mm: Allow __create_pgd_mapping() to propagate p= gtable_alloc() errors") > >> > >> from the arm64 tree. > >> > >> I fixed it up (the latter moved the INVALID_PHYS_ADDR define so I remo= ved > >> it from its new place, and there was no conflict left) and can carry t= he > >> 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. =20 > >=20 > > This is now a conflict between the mm-stable tree and Linus' tree. =20 >=20 > Should this be rebased against Linus's tree in mm-stable first before the= pull request ? No, it should just be mentioned to Linus in he PR. He would figure it out anyway. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/dX3c+O5/3DOQOwDEjJtIqhv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmkxInkACgkQAVBC80lX 0GwAOgf/ZDtUhUE5uULAgUa3qHTLeCC3i47Riz+45Jxx1+WNIHZbYWeUyjiTAm6P d0EaA6t3e2PgZ492FT0DngXo0xZ7imnBQWFHu8P301W7GGQeihOsHPxxVL5kqJ/8 xWcneDAXki1B+80hKyy4JpAFrT9sRdGrVpOKM/ZYd2itx69sDqp3DLWlfYBCELod b+1xPc6Jkcp3eGx07d2oESoGOWQcauYdFsf08vRflTKORVVr2Nk/LfwPW5/QsEos mD19l6rtLrtyGr4Tu3E//NtR/Z15hzUVzC3u4B58oiSg+YVooT7j33dyQPQvdtV4 BWO+KltIg3zt1/REqLR/4HAZZieMiw== =Lgk/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/dX3c+O5/3DOQOwDEjJtIqhv--