Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <0f498561-4bd3-3247-4ef4-796dc15cdaf3@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jul 2022 10:00:20 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfio tree with the kvms390 tree
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20220711171353.2b8eb09a@canb.auug.org.au>
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220711171353.2b8eb09a@canb.auug.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Am 11.07.22 um 09:13 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Betreff:
> linux-next: manual merge of the vfio tree with the kvms390 tree
> Von:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Datum:
> 11.07.22, 09:13
> 
> An:
> Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
> Kopie (CC):
> Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>, Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>    include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h
> 
> between commits:
> 
>    b6a7066f4e9b ("vfio/pci: introduce CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM")
>    6518ebc68c72 ("vfio-pci/zdev: add open/close device hooks")
> 
> from the kvms390 tree and commit:
> 
>    d1877e639bc6 ("vfio: de-extern-ify function prototypes")
> 
> from the vfio 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.
> 

Alex, Paolo,

I do have a topic branch that we could merge, but I think the conflict is trivial enough for the time being.