Hi Cascardo,
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:53:04 -0300 Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 01:18:43PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/qp.c between commit 5b0c275926b8
> > ("RDMA/cxgb4: Fix SQ allocation when on-chip SQ is disabled") from the
> > infiniband tree and commit 9919d5bd01b9 ("RDMA/cxgb4: Fix onchip queue
> > support for T5") from the net-next tree.
> >
> > I think that they are 2 different fixes for the same problem, so I just
> > used the net-next version and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> > is required).
>
> Commit 5b0c275926b8 also keeps the intention of the original patch which
> broke it, which was to return an error code, in case the allocation fails.
> Commit 9919d5bd01b9 fix will return 0 in case the allocation fails.
>
> We should keep the other fix or fix the code again to return the proper
> error code.
OK, so today I switched the conflict fix to use the version from the
infiniband tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpVOcA4O1IVb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
