Ok. Will do.
On May 20, 2014 11:01:00 PM PDT, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 05/20/2014 09:12 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in
>> > arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c between commit fa81511bb0bb ("x86-64,
>> > modify_ldt: Make support for 16-bit segments a runtime option")
>> > from Linus' tree and commit 34273f41d57e ("x86, espfix: Make it
>> > possible to disable 16-bit support") from the tip tree.
>> >
>> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no
>> > action is required).
>> >
>>
>> This (and the previous one) is not the correct fix, although it will
>> work. The correct fix is instead to completely revert fa81511bb0bb
>> before merging in tip:x86/espfix.
>>
>> Sorry for the inconvenience. Linus generally doesn't like it when we
>> fix up merges for him, or I'd set up a "clean" tip:x86/espfix branch.
>
>Please merge x86/urgent into x86/vdso while memories are still fresh -
>fixing up conflicts between our own branches is entirely fine (I'm
>doing it all the time to help the development flow) and it will make
>life easier.
>
>What Linus dislikes most are merges between completely _unrelated_
>topic branches, especially if they cross maintenance domains.
>
>Thanks,
>
> Ingo
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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
