On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/bug.h
>
> between commit:
>
> f13d52cb3fad ("arm64: define BUG() instruction without CONFIG_BUG")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> 19d436268dde ("debug: Add _ONCE() logic to report_bug()")
>
> from the tip 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/arm64/include/asm/bug.h
> index 0bfe1df12b19,a9be1072933c..000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/bug.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/bug.h
> @@@ -42,27 -45,19 +42,26 @@@
> _BUGVERBOSE_LOCATION(__FILE__, __LINE__) \
> ".short " #flags "\n\t" \
> ".popsection\n" \
> - \
> - "1: brk %[imm]" \
> - :: [imm] "i" (BUG_BRK_IMM) \
> -)
> + "1: "
> +#else
> +#define __BUG_ENTRY(flags) ""
> +#endif
> +
> +#define __BUG_FLAGS(flags) \
> + asm volatile ( \
> + __BUG_ENTRY(flags) \
> + "brk %[imm]" :: [imm] "i" (BUG_BRK_IMM) \
> + );
>
> -#define BUG() do { \
> - _BUG_FLAGS(0); \
> - unreachable(); \
> +
> +#define BUG() do { \
> + __BUG_FLAGS(0); \
> + unreachable(); \
> } while (0)
>
> - #define __WARN_TAINT(taint) \
> - __BUG_FLAGS(BUGFLAG_TAINT(taint))
> + #define __WARN_FLAGS(flags) _BUG_FLAGS(BUGFLAG_WARNING|(flags))
>
> -#endif /* ! CONFIG_GENERIC_BUG */
> +#define HAVE_ARCH_BUG
Mark Brown's build bot now reports this build failure:
arm64-defconfig
../arch/arm64/include/asm/bug.h:62:29: error: implicit declaration of
function '_BUG_FLAGS' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
I think the last line needs s/_BUG_FLAGS/__BUG_FLAGS/
aside from that, the merge looks right to me, but I wonder if
there is a way to prevent the conflict from showing up later
for Linus.
Arnd
--
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
