Hi all,

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

  drivers/thunderbolt/test.c

between commit:

  9d2d0a5cf0ca ("thunderbolt: Use different lane for second DisplayPort tunnel")

from the thunderbolt tree and commit:

  7aadf8433357 ("thunderbolt: test: use NULL macros")

from the kunit-next 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/thunderbolt/test.c
index 66b6e665e96f,be9b1d7e63d2..000000000000
--- a/drivers/thunderbolt/test.c
+++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/test.c
@@@ -1348,8 -1348,8 +1348,8 @@@ static void tb_test_tunnel_dp(struct ku
  	in = &host->ports[5];
  	out = &dev->ports[13];
  
 -	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, tunnel != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, tunnel);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, tunnel->type, TB_TUNNEL_DP);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->src_port, in);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->dst_port, out);
@@@ -1394,8 -1394,8 +1394,8 @@@ static void tb_test_tunnel_dp_chain(str
  	in = &host->ports[5];
  	out = &dev4->ports[14];
  
 -	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, tunnel != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, tunnel);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, tunnel->type, TB_TUNNEL_DP);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->src_port, in);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->dst_port, out);
@@@ -1444,8 -1444,8 +1444,8 @@@ static void tb_test_tunnel_dp_tree(stru
  	in = &dev2->ports[13];
  	out = &dev5->ports[13];
  
 -	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, tunnel != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, tunnel);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, tunnel->type, TB_TUNNEL_DP);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->src_port, in);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->dst_port, out);
@@@ -1509,8 -1509,8 +1509,8 @@@ static void tb_test_tunnel_dp_max_lengt
  	in = &dev6->ports[13];
  	out = &dev12->ports[13];
  
 -	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, tunnel != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, tunnel);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, tunnel->type, TB_TUNNEL_DP);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->src_port, in);
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, tunnel->dst_port, out);
@@@ -1627,8 -1627,8 +1627,8 @@@ static void tb_test_tunnel_port_on_path
  	in = &dev2->ports[13];
  	out = &dev5->ports[13];
  
 -	dp_tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	dp_tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, dp_tunnel != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, dp_tunnel);
  
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, tb_tunnel_port_on_path(dp_tunnel, in));
  	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, tb_tunnel_port_on_path(dp_tunnel, out));
@@@ -2009,8 -2009,8 +2009,8 @@@ static void tb_test_credit_alloc_dp(str
  	in = &host->ports[5];
  	out = &dev->ports[14];
  
 -	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	tunnel = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, tunnel != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, tunnel);
  	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, tunnel->npaths, (size_t)3);
  
  	/* Video (main) path */
@@@ -2245,8 -2245,8 +2245,8 @@@ static struct tb_tunnel *TB_TEST_DP_TUN
  
  	in = &host->ports[5];
  	out = &dev->ports[13];
 -	dp_tunnel1 = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	dp_tunnel1 = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, dp_tunnel1 != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, dp_tunnel1);
  	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, dp_tunnel1->npaths, (size_t)3);
  
  	path = dp_tunnel1->paths[0];
@@@ -2282,8 -2282,8 +2282,8 @@@ static struct tb_tunnel *TB_TEST_DP_TUN
  
  	in = &host->ports[6];
  	out = &dev->ports[14];
 -	dp_tunnel2 = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 0, 0);
 +	dp_tunnel2 = tb_tunnel_alloc_dp(NULL, in, out, 1, 0, 0);
- 	KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, dp_tunnel2 != NULL);
+ 	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, dp_tunnel2);
  	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, dp_tunnel2->npaths, (size_t)3);
  
  	path = dp_tunnel2->paths[0];

Hi Stephen,

On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 03:16:12PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kunit-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/thunderbolt/test.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   9d2d0a5cf0ca ("thunderbolt: Use different lane for second DisplayPort tunnel")
> 
> from the thunderbolt tree and commit:
> 
>   7aadf8433357 ("thunderbolt: test: use NULL macros")
> 
> from the kunit-next 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.

The fixup looks good to me, thanks!