| Message ID | 20240222145842.1714b195@canb.auug.org.au (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the drm-xe tree | expand |
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 4:58 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: > > include/linux/bits.h > > between commits: > > b77cb9640f1f ("bits: introduce fixed-type genmasks") > 34b80df456ca ("bits: Introduce fixed-type BIT") > > from the drm-xe tree and commit: > > 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK") > > 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. Lucas, Oded, Thomas, do you have a topic branch that I can merge? Paolo
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:42:01AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 4:58 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: >> >> include/linux/bits.h >> >> between commits: >> >> b77cb9640f1f ("bits: introduce fixed-type genmasks") >> 34b80df456ca ("bits: Introduce fixed-type BIT") >> >> from the drm-xe tree and commit: >> >> 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK") >> >> 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. > >Lucas, Oded, Thomas, > >do you have a topic branch that I can merge? Yury set up a new tree and the patch we had in drm-xe-next will (eventually) go through that tree. We also had some issues with those patches, so they are currently on the back burner. Current discussion going on at https://lore.kernel.org/intel-xe/20240208074521.577076-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com/T/#mc0d83438c5b6164eabea85bb3b5eef7503dade84 I'm surprised to see 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK") with no acks from maintainer though. Btw, aren't you missing some includes in include/uapi/linux/bits.h? thanks Lucas De Marchi > >Paolo >
On 3/1/24 19:17, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > I'm surprised to see 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros > for GENMASK") with no acks from maintainer though. The patch sat on the list for a couple months, then I went ahead and committed it. The changes to include/linux/bits.h are just code movement from kernel to uapi header (plus the uglification of BITS_PER_LONG and BITS_PER_LONG_LONG per uapi rules) so I think that's fine. But I'll drop an email to them to ask them if they want MAINTAINERS to include the new file. > Btw, aren't you missing some includes in include/uapi/linux/bits.h? Yeah, uapi/linux/const.h is needed to use the macros in bits.h. I didn't notice because KVM headers include it anyway and, on the include/linux/ side, include/linux/bits.h gets it via include/linux/const.h. Paolo
diff --cc include/linux/bits.h index 811846ce110e,0eb24d21aac2..000000000000 --- a/include/linux/bits.h
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in: include/linux/bits.h between commits: b77cb9640f1f ("bits: introduce fixed-type genmasks") 34b80df456ca ("bits: Introduce fixed-type BIT") from the drm-xe tree and commit: 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK") 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.