Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-157657-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 13:07:57 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>, "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" <rppt@kernel.org>,
 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>, Kent Overstreet
 <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the modules tree with the mm tree
Message-Id: <20240424130757.531be2842c505a62246d180c@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20240424123935.2f65e886@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20240424123935.2f65e886@canb.auug.org.au>
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 12:39:35 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the modules tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/module/main.c
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   7f014cdda4cb ("lib: code tagging module support")
>   5ab9b0c7ea5c ("lib: prevent module unloading if memory is not freed")
> 
> from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commits:
> 
>   0746f9982603 ("module: make module_memory_{alloc,free} more self-contained")
>   18da532eefc8 ("mm/execmem, arch: convert remaining overrides of module_alloc to execmem")
> 
> from the modules tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I think, 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.

That's a shame.  I don't see much that we can do to reduce the damage here.

Suren&Kent, please review (and preferably) test Stephen's handiwork in
linux-next?