linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the risc-v tree

Stephen Rothwell posted 1 patch 1 year, 3 months ago
linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the risc-v tree
Posted by Stephen Rothwell 1 year, 3 months ago
Hi all,

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

  arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h

between commit:

  f15c21a3de1b ("RISC-V: Enable IPI CPU Backtrace")

from the risc-v tree and commit:

  f8619b66bdb1 ("irqchip/riscv-intc: Add ACPI support for AIA")

from the pm 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 arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
index 8330d16b05b5,7e9a84a005ed..000000000000
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
@@@ -12,11 -12,8 +12,13 @@@
  
  #include <asm-generic/irq.h>
  
+ #define INVALID_CONTEXT UINT_MAX
+ 
 +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 +void arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace(const cpumask_t *mask, int exclude_cpu);
 +#define arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace
 +#endif
 +
  void riscv_set_intc_hwnode_fn(struct fwnode_handle *(*fn)(void));
  
  struct fwnode_handle *riscv_get_intc_hwnode(void);
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the risc-v tree
Posted by Stephen Rothwell 1 year, 3 months ago
Hi all,

On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 12:11:40 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   f15c21a3de1b ("RISC-V: Enable IPI CPU Backtrace")
> 
> from the risc-v tree and commit:
> 
>   f8619b66bdb1 ("irqchip/riscv-intc: Add ACPI support for AIA")
> 
> from the pm 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 arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> index 8330d16b05b5,7e9a84a005ed..000000000000
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> @@@ -12,11 -12,8 +12,13 @@@
>   
>   #include <asm-generic/irq.h>
>   
> + #define INVALID_CONTEXT UINT_MAX
> + 
>  +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>  +void arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace(const cpumask_t *mask, int exclude_cpu);
>  +#define arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace
>  +#endif
>  +
>   void riscv_set_intc_hwnode_fn(struct fwnode_handle *(*fn)(void));
>   
>   struct fwnode_handle *riscv_get_intc_hwnode(void);

This is now a conflict between the risc-v tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell