| Message ID | 20210622152544.74e01567@canb.auug.org.au (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the powerpc tree | expand |
On 22/06/21 07:25, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: > > include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > > between commit: > > 9bb4a6f38fd4 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Add KVM_CAP_PPC_RPT_INVALIDATE capability") > > from the powerpc tree and commits: > > 644f706719f0 ("KVM: x86: hyper-v: Introduce KVM_CAP_HYPERV_ENFORCE_CPUID") > 6dba94035203 ("KVM: x86: Introduce KVM_GET_SREGS2 / KVM_SET_SREGS2") > 0dbb11230437 ("KVM: X86: Introduce KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE hypercall") > > from the kvm 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. > What are the dependencies of these KVM patches on patches from the bare metal trees, and can you guys *please* start using topic branches? I've been asking you for literally years, but this is the first time I remember that Linus will have to resolve conflicts in uAPI changes and it is *not* acceptable. Please drop the patches at https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-ppc/msg18666.html from the powerpc tree, and merge them through either the kvm-powerpc or kvm trees. Paolo
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes: > On 22/06/21 07:25, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: >> >> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >> >> between commit: >> >> 9bb4a6f38fd4 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Add KVM_CAP_PPC_RPT_INVALIDATE capability") >> >> from the powerpc tree and commits: >> >> 644f706719f0 ("KVM: x86: hyper-v: Introduce KVM_CAP_HYPERV_ENFORCE_CPUID") >> 6dba94035203 ("KVM: x86: Introduce KVM_GET_SREGS2 / KVM_SET_SREGS2") >> 0dbb11230437 ("KVM: X86: Introduce KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE hypercall") >> >> from the kvm 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. >> > > What are the dependencies of these KVM patches on patches from the bare > metal trees, I don't think there's actually a semantic dependency on my tree, but there's multiple textual conflicts with my tree. That series has to go via both trees, or there will be conflicts. > ... and can you guys *please* start using topic branches? > > I've been asking you for literally years, but this is the first time I > remember that Linus will have to resolve conflicts in uAPI changes and > it is *not* acceptable. The patches are in a topic branch, which I will ask you to pull before the merge window, in order to resolve any conflicts. > Please drop the patches at > https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-ppc/msg18666.html from the powerpc > tree, and merge them through either the kvm-powerpc or kvm trees. The kvm-ppc tree is not taking patches at the moment. But it doesn't matter anyway, this series needs to be merged into my tree and the KVM tree regardless. The topic branch is here: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git/log/?h=topic/ppc-kvm The commit Stephen mentioned has been rebased since to squash in a fix. But what is in the topic branch is now final, I won't rebase what's there. cheers
On 22/06/21 16:51, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Please drop the patches at >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-ppc/msg18666.html from the powerpc >> tree, and merge them through either the kvm-powerpc or kvm trees. > The kvm-ppc tree is not taking patches at the moment. If so, let's remove the "T" entry from MAINTAINERS and add an entry for the kvm@vger.kernel.org mailing list. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git/log/?h=topic/ppc-kvm > > The commit Stephen mentioned has been rebased since to squash in a fix. > But what is in the topic branch is now final, I won't rebase what's > there. Thanks, I pulled it. Anyway, if the workflow is not the one indicated by MAINTAINERS it's never a bad idea to Cc more people when applying patches. Paolo
diff --cc include/uapi/linux/kvm.h index 9016e96de971,9febe1412f7a..000000000000 --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: include/uapi/linux/kvm.h between commit: 9bb4a6f38fd4 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Add KVM_CAP_PPC_RPT_INVALIDATE capability") from the powerpc tree and commits: 644f706719f0 ("KVM: x86: hyper-v: Introduce KVM_CAP_HYPERV_ENFORCE_CPUID") 6dba94035203 ("KVM: x86: Introduce KVM_GET_SREGS2 / KVM_SET_SREGS2") 0dbb11230437 ("KVM: X86: Introduce KVM_HC_MAP_GPA_RANGE hypercall") from the kvm 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.