Em Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:27:35 +0100
Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 02:37:26PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Borislav,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the edac-amd tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > ef91afa61088 ("edac: move documentation from edac_mc.c to edac_core.h")
> >
> > from the edac tree and commit:
> >
> > c73e8833bec5 ("EDAC, mc: Fix locking around mc_devices list")
> >
> > from the edac-amd tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below - there may be more fixes needed in
> > edac_core.h) 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.
>
> Just one issue which has nothing to do with linux-next. There's still
> that in ef91afa61088:
>
> > +/**
> > + * edac_mc_find: Search for a mem_ctl_info structure whose index is @idx.
> > + *
> > + * @idx: index to be seek
> > + *
> > + * If found, return a pointer to the structure.
> > + * Else return NULL.
> > + *
> > + * Caller must hold mem_ctls_mutex.
> > + */
>
> That last sentence in the comment is not true anymore - edac_mc_find()
> is grabbing the mutex itself as it should be. Mauro, please fix that in
> your tree.
Fixed. If you have a stable branch, I can rebase it on the top
of your patches, in order to avoid the confict at linux-next.
Regards,
Mauro
--
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
