On Fri, 12 Jun 2026 13:41:00 +0200 Matthieu Baerts wrote: > > I was aware of the conflict but didn't realize a note would be helpful > > for the merge. I should have included one. > > > > Could you point me to an example commit/patch that contains such a note so I > > can understand the expected format and procedure? > > In this particular example, I think it would have been easier to have > waited for the fix to land in net-next -- after the weekly sync with net > -- and then send the net-next patches. > > When this cannot be avoided, then you can mention the conflict, and > ideally share a diff of the resolution, plus a description, especially > when it is not obvious, when simply saying "take the version from X" is > helpful, when extra modifications are needed, etc. e.g. [1]. Something > similar to what Mark is usually doing on the linux-next ML, or what I > did here.
Thanks for explaining! This conflict was avoidable but I didn't find the appropriately polite explanation within me :) When conflicting code is _already committed_ to net-next we can deal with the conflict. If there's a patch only posted but not commited and we notice a bug - the net-next patch should be explicitly withdrawn and reposted once the fix has propagated.
