On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 11:08:30AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 06:21:02 +0000,
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hypercalls.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > d2c173acbf93 ("KVM: arm64: expose SMCCC_ARCH_WORKAROUND_4 to guests")
> >
> > from the arm64 tree and commit:
> >
> > c0000e58c74e ("KVM: arm64: Introduce KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_2")
> >
> > from the kvm-arm 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.
>
> Thanks for resolving all 3 conflicts, which look good to me.
>
> Oliver, would you consider picking the following arm64 branches:
>
> - arm64/for-next/leaky-prefetcher
Can you hold fire on this one, please? ^^^
Catalin asked for comments on Friday and I'm not sure I'm happy with it.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/174197730164.734861.6726211221092480832.b4-ty@xxxxxxx/
Will reply there shortly...
Will
