Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <b8c2663b-69df-913f-8da1-de6b7bd189ce@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 Jan 2022 09:22:04 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.4.0
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the risc-v tree
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
References: <20220112114024.7be8aac6@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20220117085431.7bef9ebc@canb.auug.org.au>
 <CAAhSdy3gEW+SC1GCH0V4iVA9h1sxeVV-V=x4kG7w_9tcVTtamw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy3gEW+SC1GCH0V4iVA9h1sxeVV-V=x4kG7w_9tcVTtamw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 1/17/22 05:13, Anup Patel wrote:
> The commit c62a76859723 ("RISC-V: KVM: Add SBI v0.2 base extension")
> is already merged in Linus' tree.
> 
> Since you are yet to send PR for 5.17, we have two options:
> 1) Rebase your for-next branch upon latest Linus' tree master branch
> 2) Send "RISC-V: Use SBI SRST extension when available" in the
> next batch of changes for 5.17 after 5.17-rc1
> 
> Let me know if you want me to rebase and send v8 patch of
> "RISC-V: Use SBI SRST extension when available"
> 
> In future, we should coordinate and use a shared tag for such
> conflicting changes.

Palmer should just send it to Linus and note "enum sbi_ext_id has a 
trivial conflict" in the pull request message.

We'll sort it out better in the future, but it's such a minor conflict 
that it is not even a nuisance.

Paolo