On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:29:43 -0800 Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 07:21:56AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 20:20:05 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got conflicts in: > > > > > > include/linux/memcontrol.h > > > mm/memcontrol.c > > > > > > between commit: > > > > > > bcfe06bf2622 ("mm: memcontrol: Use helpers to read page's memcg data") > > > > > > from the bpf-next tree and commits: > > > > > > 6771a349b8c3 ("mm/memcg: remove incorrect comment") > > > c3970fcb1f21 ("mm: move lruvec stats update functions to vmstat.h") > > > > > > from the akpm-current tree. > > > > ... > > > > Just a reminder that this conflict still exists. Commit bcfe06bf2622 > > is now in the net-next tree. > > Thanks, Stephen! > > I wonder if it's better to update these 2 commits in the mm tree to avoid > conflicts? > > Basically split your fix into two and merge it into mm commits. > The last chunk in the patch should be merged into "mm/memcg: remove incorrect comment". > And the rest into "mm: move lruvec stats update functions to vmstat.h". > > Andrew, what do you think? I have "mm/memcg: remove incorrect comment" and "mm: move lruvec stats update functions to vmstat.h" staged against Linus's tree and plan to send them to him later today. So I trust the BPF tree maintainers will be able to resolve these minor things when those patches turn up in mainline.