From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.9]) (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 2019D1862A; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 01:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725847056; cv=none; b=nWRSKxMBt0dQ+mg8TgaVZqC1Wd/uFKXFhASMHw7XoR9wh2UzOj8yN7MY5Y/A46TlXQEiu4lIkSJSnhUjyASuw/AiIe7SUcCd6LqHVZewkZXc8Z2N0r5HJWlcLFwEt1UfhFJ53i7+iP2LbjOxUXiuxd2jDC+ybDaHgm/6clg5xNA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725847056; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4z/JGb26gAFsABTHxjzGPpN6+ZoAGK8zsDPYw4EPmUM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XoFO8i9e2EOsYkXNdSJXXfEgnKFr1S6uRmCq+i4cJZ82qJhCxs6kSw9tlr3BLAAnYEvnJGUK+NUuZQuh5Ehg9ZjRujNkRsXudNADAqT0Q4ticXE05BHzDfR8/bs2n56oebuEylVmKLSWVhkfvCDfe2RWTrELy+eKOpHZPvYE/EM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=PY+IyflN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="PY+IyflN" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1725847054; x=1757383054; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=4z/JGb26gAFsABTHxjzGPpN6+ZoAGK8zsDPYw4EPmUM=; b=PY+IyflNKo8rnxNU/+ERX26IVSMIev9tc16zRyUdAvdv+6LsBrdBI/VQ wY+nGRVGsSw/z7GAtHDVsl+MmpW09Xv13JKIDTkLxexkqh3jfYJwvCYgc 9OQNwGaT/4P1TyFjgkicX5itR21TqIYNdM/e+KaHW7yH+ee8KW4m5wqCl brIzJCJXipwXnEfp5cWCRzZZEWzP3b+NgBFvpSGja69n3xNpcOAPn/IP1 lE0vjhGU8T6ISWJKmPqYByA1x40zcsIkeCb/6fGlA97WCbc99k9W0rxjW RyrBNIvAujJgmDoYR6JsA9rJIdARsKd8NwfG2h2bJ0ht4km/KBMRVqZOd w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: JPZ8XVo2TgKx/BMrSlrkkQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: a1eChZNpTC6nOzAwMz00Gw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11189"; a="47043991" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,213,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="47043991" Received: from fmviesa008.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.148]) by orvoesa101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Sep 2024 18:57:34 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: qCDsMIRWTIWzC7S4AJI8iQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: k39BLQAqTP+PIMekHoumgA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,213,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="66548920" Received: from yhuang6-desk2.sh.intel.com (HELO yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com) ([10.238.208.55]) by fmviesa008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Sep 2024 18:57:32 -0700 From: "Huang, Ying" To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm tree with Linus' tree In-Reply-To: <20240909100043.60668995@canb.auug.org.au> (Stephen Rothwell's message of "Mon, 9 Sep 2024 10:00:43 +1000") References: <20240909100043.60668995@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 09:53:59 +0800 Message-ID: <87cyld1tjc.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the mm tree got a conflict in: > > kernel/resource.c > > between commit: > > ea72ce5da228 ("x86/kaslr: Expose and use the end of the physical memory address space") > > from Linus' tree and commit: > > e2941fe697c8 ("resource, kunit: add test case for region_intersects()") > > from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree. > > I fixed it up (I just used the former - and 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. The fix looks good to me. Thanks for your help! -- Best Regards, Huang, Ying