Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1421573 > unrolled thread

linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the s390 tree

Started byStephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
First post2016-06-14 07:00 +0200
Last post2016-06-14 10:50 +0200
Articles 2 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel


Contents

  linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the s390 tree Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2016-06-14 07:00 +0200
    Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the s390 tree Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-06-14 10:50 +0200

#1421573 — linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the s390 tree

FromStephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date2016-06-14 07:00 +0200
Subjectlinux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the s390 tree
Message-ID<rJOCd-8ma-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c

between commit:

  6c22c9863760 ("s390: avoid extable collisions")

from the s390 tree and commit:

  e65f30e0cb29 ("s390: hypfs: Move diag implementation and data definitions")

from the kvms390 tree.

I fixed it up (using the kvms390 version and then adding the following
patch) 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.

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:47:33 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] s390: merge fix up for __diag204 move

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
 arch/s390/kernel/diag.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c b/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
index a44faf4a0454..2289d6f8bec0 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
@@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static inline int __diag204(unsigned long subcode, unsigned long size, void *add
 
 	asm volatile(
 		"	diag	%2,%0,0x204\n"
-		"0:\n"
+		"0:	nopr	%%r7\n"
 		EX_TABLE(0b,0b)
 		: "+d" (_subcode), "+d" (_size) : "d" (addr) : "memory");
 	if (_subcode)
-- 
2.8.1

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1421675

FromChristian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Date2016-06-14 10:50 +0200
Message-ID<rJScO-2p8-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1421573
On 06/14/2016 06:51 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   6c22c9863760 ("s390: avoid extable collisions")
> 
> from the s390 tree and commit:
> 
>   e65f30e0cb29 ("s390: hypfs: Move diag implementation and data definitions")
> 
> from the kvms390 tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (using the kvms390 version and then adding the following
> patch) 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.
> 
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:47:33 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] s390: merge fix up for __diag204 move
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
>  arch/s390/kernel/diag.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c b/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
> index a44faf4a0454..2289d6f8bec0 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static inline int __diag204(unsigned long subcode, unsigned long size, void *add
> 
>  	asm volatile(
>  		"	diag	%2,%0,0x204\n"
> -		"0:\n"
> +		"0:	nopr	%%r7\n"
>  		EX_TABLE(0b,0b)
>  		: "+d" (_subcode), "+d" (_size) : "d" (addr) : "memory");
>  	if (_subcode)
> 


Yes, thanks. This conflict (and the other preexisting one) will move soon to Paolos KVM tree
as I plan to submit my first pull request soon.

Christian 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web