Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1366818 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-30 02:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-03-30 12:40 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2016-03-30 02:40 +0200
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-30 12:40 +0200
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 02:40 +0200 |
| Subject | linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree |
| Message-ID | <rickV-5N1-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi Paul,
Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in:
kernel/rcu/tree.c
between commit:
abedf8e2419f ("rcu: Use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree")
from Linus' tree and commit:
08cace5914ea ("DIAGS: Crude exploratory hack")
from the rcu tree.
I fixed it up (I used the rcu tree version) 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.
I really don't think that that rcu tree patch should be in linux-next,
right?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 12:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rilHz-3WZ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1366818 |
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:32:14AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in:
>
> kernel/rcu/tree.c
>
> between commit:
>
> abedf8e2419f ("rcu: Use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 08cace5914ea ("DIAGS: Crude exploratory hack")
>
> from the rcu tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I used the rcu tree version) 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.
>
> I really don't think that that rcu tree patch should be in linux-next,
> right?
Right you are! I will rework to get the diagnostics out of your way.
-Might- have helped find one of the bugs, but don't look now...
Thanx, Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web