| Message ID | 20180319140657.223852a1@canb.auug.org.au (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi All, On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:06:57 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/bus/arm-cci.c > > between commit: > > 3de6be7a3dd8 ("drivers/bus: Split Arm CCI driver") > > from the arm-soc tree and commit: > > edb39592a587 ("perf: Fix sibling iteration") > > from the tip tree. > > I fixed it up (I added the following merge fix patch) 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. > > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> > Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:04:52 +1100 > Subject: [PATCH] perf/core: another merge fix for "drivers/bus: Split Arm CCI > driver" > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> > --- > drivers/perf/arm-cci.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c > index 192d23b760a0..383b2d3dcbc6 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c > @@ -1265,7 +1265,7 @@ static int validate_group(struct perf_event *event) > if (!validate_event(event->pmu, &fake_pmu, leader)) > return -EINVAL; > > - list_for_each_entry(sibling, &leader->sibling_list, sibling_list) { > + for_each_sibling_event(sibling, leader) { > if (!validate_event(event->pmu, &fake_pmu, sibling)) > return -EINVAL; > } > -- This conflict is now between the arm-soc tree and Linus' tree.
diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c index 192d23b760a0..383b2d3dcbc6 100644 --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cci.c @@ -1265,7 +1265,7 @@ static int validate_group(struct perf_event *event) if (!validate_event(event->pmu, &fake_pmu, leader)) return -EINVAL; - list_for_each_entry(sibling, &leader->sibling_list, sibling_list) { + for_each_sibling_event(sibling, leader) { if (!validate_event(event->pmu, &fake_pmu, sibling)) return -EINVAL; }
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in: drivers/bus/arm-cci.c between commit: 3de6be7a3dd8 ("drivers/bus: Split Arm CCI driver") from the arm-soc tree and commit: edb39592a587 ("perf: Fix sibling iteration") from the tip tree. I fixed it up (I added the following merge fix patch) 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. From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:04:52 +1100 Subject: [PATCH] perf/core: another merge fix for "drivers/bus: Split Arm CCI driver" Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> --- drivers/perf/arm-cci.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)