Hi all,
On Mon, 7 May 2018 12:09:09 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
>
> between commit:
>
> e782bdcf58c5 ("bpf, x64: remove ld_abs/ld_ind")
>
> from the bpf-next tree and commit:
>
> 5f26c50143f5 ("x86/bpf: Clean up non-standard comments, to make the code
> more readable")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the former commit removed some code modified by the latter,
> so I just removed it) 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.Actually the tip tree commit has been added to the bpf-next tree as a different commit, so dropping it from the tip tree will clean this up. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
pgpaJldvXfoBa.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
