Hi Mark,
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:10:35 +0100 Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/s390/include/asm/spinlock.h
>
> between a series of commits adding wait queuing to s390 spinlocks
> from the s390 tree:
>
> eb3b7b848fb3dd00f7a57d633 s390/rwlock: introduce rwlock wait queueing
> b96f7d881ad94203e997cd2aa s390/spinlock: introduce spinlock wait queueing
> 8153380379ecc8381f6d55f64 s390/spinlock: use the cpu number +1 as spinlock value
>
> and Will's series of commits removing dummy implementations of spinlock
> related things from the tip tree:
>
> a4c1887d4c1462b0ec5a8989f locking/arch: Remove dummy arch_{read,spin,write}_lock_flags() implementations
> 0160fb177d484367e041ac251 locking/arch: Remove dummy arch_{read,spin,write}_relax() implementations
> a8a217c22116eff6c120d753c locking/core: Remove {read,spin,write}_can_lock()
>
> I'm don't feel confident I can resolve this conflict sensibly without
> taking too long so I've used the tip tree from yesterday.
Just a reminder that this conflict still exists.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
--
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
