Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kmemcheck tree with the x86 tree

From: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:53:40 +0100

* Pekka Enberg <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
> 
> On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 15:44 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the kmemcheck tree got a conflict in
> > arch/x86/mm/fault.c between commit do_page_fault ("x86: optimise x86's
> > do_page_fault (C entry point for the page fault path)") from the x86 tree
> > and commit 787ecfaa503dc63ff1831ddc74b15dad49bace1d ("x86: add hooks for
> > kmemcheck") from the kmemcheck tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (see below) but it is worth a check.  I can carry the fix
> > as necessary.
> 
> Looks good to me. Vegard?

it's resolved in tip/master already.

Stephen, could you please only report conflict resolutions that you do if 
they differ from the one done in tip/master? Or use tip/auto-latest that 
has all these conflict resolutions integrated into a single package.

A lot of internal conflicts between -tip originated trees get reported 
again and again as genuine conflicts - needlessly in 99% of the cases as 
i've already done the conflict resolution myself days (sometimes weeks) 
ahead of the linux-next resolution, and tested the end result in 
tip/master.

	Ingo