Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
Hi all, On Tue, 19 May 2020 17:23:16 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: > > arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > > between commit: > > 116ac378bb3f ("powerpc/64s: machine check interrupt update NMI accounting") > > from the powerpc tree and commit: > > 187416eeb388 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") > > from the rcu tree. This is now a conflict between commit 69ea03b56ed2 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") From Linus tree and the above powerpc tree commit. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell pgpMlwY4q2EXF.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
"Paul E. McKenney" writes: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 02:51:24PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> On Tue, 19 May 2020 17:23:16 +1000 Stephen Rothwell >> wrote: >> > >> > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: >> > >> > arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c >> > >> > between commit: >> > >> > 116ac378bb3f ("powerpc/64s: machine check interrupt update NMI >> > accounting") >> > >> > from the powerpc tree and commit: >> > >> > 187416eeb388 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") >> > >> > from the rcu tree. >> > >> > I fixed it up (I used the powerpc tree version for now) 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. >> >> This is now a conflict between the powerpc commit and commit >> >> 69ea03b56ed2 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") >> >> from the tip tree. I assume that the rcu and tip trees are sharing >> some patches (but not commits) :-( > > We are sharing commits, and in fact 187416eeb388 in the rcu tree came > from the tip tree. My guess is version skew, and that I probably have > another rebase coming up. > > Why is this happening? There are sets of conflicting commits in different > efforts, and we are trying to resolve them. But we are getting feedback > on some of those commits, which is probably what is causing the skew. Correct. We had to rebase that. I don't think we do it again. The changes I just sent out are carefully crafted to avoid that. Thanks, tglx
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 02:51:24PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Tue, 19 May 2020 17:23:16 +1000 Stephen Rothwell > wrote: > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: > > > > arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 116ac378bb3f ("powerpc/64s: machine check interrupt update NMI > > accounting") > > > > from the powerpc tree and commit: > > > > 187416eeb388 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") > > > > from the rcu tree. > > > > I fixed it up (I used the powerpc tree version for now) 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. > > This is now a conflict between the powerpc commit and commit > > 69ea03b56ed2 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") > > from the tip tree. I assume that the rcu and tip trees are sharing > some patches (but not commits) :-( We are sharing commits, and in fact 187416eeb388 in the rcu tree came from the tip tree. My guess is version skew, and that I probably have another rebase coming up. Why is this happening? There are sets of conflicting commits in different efforts, and we are trying to resolve them. But we are getting feedback on some of those commits, which is probably what is causing the skew. Thanx, Paul
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
Hi all, On Tue, 19 May 2020 17:23:16 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: > > arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > > between commit: > > 116ac378bb3f ("powerpc/64s: machine check interrupt update NMI accounting") > > from the powerpc tree and commit: > > 187416eeb388 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") > > from the rcu tree. > > I fixed it up (I used the powerpc tree version for now) 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. This is now a conflict between the powerpc commit and commit 69ea03b56ed2 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") from the tip tree. I assume that the rcu and tip trees are sharing some patches (but not commits) :-( -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell pgpqCKNtba24A.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: > > arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c > > between commit: > > 116ac378bb3f ("powerpc/64s: machine check interrupt update NMI accounting") > > from the powerpc tree and commit: > > 187416eeb388 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") > > from the rcu tree. > > I fixed it up (I used the powerpc tree version for now) and can carry the > fix as necessary. OK, I guess that works for now, we'll have to clean it up later once both trees are merged upstream. I created an issue to track it: https://github.com/linuxppc/issues/issues/298 cheers
linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c between commit: 116ac378bb3f ("powerpc/64s: machine check interrupt update NMI accounting") from the powerpc tree and commit: 187416eeb388 ("hardirq/nmi: Allow nested nmi_enter()") from the rcu tree. I fixed it up (I used the powerpc tree version for now) 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. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell pgpN9r4E3myL3.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc tree
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in: arch/powerpc/Kconfig between commit: d6c569b99558 ("powerpc/64: Move HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING from pseries to common Kconfig") from the powerpc tree and commit: c7327406b3c3 ("rcu: Make arch select smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() strength") from the rcu 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. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell diff --cc arch/powerpc/Kconfig index a47e2b22df67,9fecd004fee8.. --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig @@@ -164,10 -164,11 +164,11 @@@ config PP select ARCH_HAS_SCALED_CPUTIME if VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_NATIVE select HAVE_ARCH_HARDENED_USERCOPY select HAVE_KERNEL_GZIP - select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR + select HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING if PPC64 + select ARCH_WEAK_RELEASE_ACQUIRE config GENERIC_CSUM - def_bool CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN + def_bool n config EARLY_PRINTK bool