On Sun, Jan 5, 2025 at 7:09 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:24:46 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got conflicts in:
> >
> > include/linux/mm.h
> > include/linux/mm_types.h
> > kernel/fork.c
> > tools/testing/vma/vma_internal.h
> >
> > between commits:
> >
> > 5f0d64389e1f ("mm: convert mm_lock_seq to a proper seqcount")
> > 062111898568 ("mm: move per-vma lock into vm_area_struct")
> > 85ad413389ae ("mm: make vma cache SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU")
> >
> > from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
> >
> > eb449bd96954 ("mm: convert mm_lock_seq to a proper seqcount")
> >
> > from the tip tree.
> >
> > Note that commits 5f0d64389e1f and eb449bd96954 are identical patches.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I used the mm tree version) 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.
>
> I got 2 more conflicts today due to the duplicate patch above.
Hi Stephen,
Have you been able to resolve the conflicts? Can I help with that?
Thanks,
Suren.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
