On 05/09/2018 06:21 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 8 May 2018 10:26:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>>
>> arch/s390/net/bpf_jit.S
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>> de5cb6eb514e ("s390: use expoline thunks in the BPF JIT")
>>
>> from the s390 tree and commit:
>>
>> e1cf4befa297 ("bpf, s390x: remove ld_abs/ld_ind")
>>
>> from the bpf-next tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (I just removed the file as the latter does) 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.
>
> This is now a conflict between the net-next and s390 trees.
Right, bpf-next merged as usual into net-next two days ago; so same
resolution applies.
--
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
