Hollis Blanchard writes: > On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 09:29 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > Hollis Blanchard writes: > > > > > > Patch is in Paulus -next already so we'll have to do a manual resolve. > > > > > > Who has to do it? My code should "win". > > > > Do you have your own tree or is all your stuff in the main kvm tree? > > > > If there is a powerpc KVM tree, I could pull that and resolve the > > conflict, but I don't want to pull all the queued up KVM stuff. > > It's just the main KVM tree. > > > Worst case is Linus gets to resolve the conflict in the merge window. > > If that's just a matter of him taking your version of the file, it > > should be within his powers to manage. :) > > Yeah, that's what I meant by "win"... whatever changes Ben made are to > now-dead code, so the code in kvm.git should be used. Does Linus need > special instruction to do this, or how does that work? ppc44x_defconfig now fails to build in my tree because of _tlbil_all being undefined (it has CONFIG_KVM=y), so I need some sort of fix. What would happen if I made arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c look like the version from the KVM tree? Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
