> On Apr 11, 2024, at 07:49, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the riscv-dt tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/riscv/Makefile
>
> between commit:
>
> 3b938e231b66 ("riscv: merge two if-blocks for KBUILD_IMAGE")
>
> from the risc-v tree and commit:
>
> ef10bdf9c3e6 ("riscv: Kconfig.socs: Split ARCH_CANAAN and SOC_CANAAN_K210")
>
I am the author of this commit. I just renamed CONFIG_ARCH_CANAAN to
CONFIG_SOC_CANAAN_K210 in arch/riscv/Makefile.
> from the riscv-dt 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/riscv/Makefile
> index 7c60bbe1f785,fa6c389c3986..000000000000
> --- a/arch/riscv/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/riscv/Makefile
> @@@ -143,15 -133,7 +143,15 @@@ boot := arch/riscv/boo
> ifeq ($(CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL),y)
> KBUILD_IMAGE := $(boot)/xipImage
> else
> - ifeq ($(CONFIG_RISCV_M_MODE)$(CONFIG_ARCH_CANAAN),yy)
> ++ifeq ($(CONFIG_RISCV_M_MODE)$(CONFIG_SOC_CANAAN_K210),yy)
I reviewed commit 3b938e231b66 ("riscv: merge two if-blocks for
KBUILD_IMAGE"). Your change only replaces the ARCH_CANAAN symbol with
SOC_CANAAN_K210 here. My intention for ef10bdf9c3e6 ("riscv: Kconfig.socs:
Split ARCH_CANAAN and SOC_CANAAN_K210") is to use loader.bin only for
Canaan K210 SoC but not for other Canaan SoCs. So I think that's the right
way to resolve merge conflict.
Reviewed-by: Yangyu Chen <cyy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> +KBUILD_IMAGE := $(boot)/loader.bin
> +else
> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_EFI_ZBOOT),)
> KBUILD_IMAGE := $(boot)/Image.gz
> +else
> +KBUILD_IMAGE := $(boot)/vmlinuz.efi
> +endif
> +endif
> endif
>
> libs-y += arch/riscv/lib/
