* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with Linus' tree
@ 2009-03-05 5:18 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2009-03-05 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter; +Cc: linux-next, Nick Piggin, Paul E. McKenney
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
include/linux/rcupdate.h between commit
a682604838763981613e42015cd0e39f2989d6bb ("rcu: Teach RCU that idle task
is not quiscent state at boot") from Linus' tree and commit
32efb35b328d0e87fa5358239c54c889226cc6e7 ("SLQB slab allocator (try 2)")
from the slab tree.
Just a context change. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix
as necessary.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
diff --cc include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 528343e,e2917ee..0000000
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@@ -42,19 -43,6 +43,9 @@@
#include <linux/lockdep.h>
#include <linux/completion.h>
- /**
- * struct rcu_head - callback structure for use with RCU
- * @next: next update requests in a list
- * @func: actual update function to call after the grace period.
- */
- struct rcu_head {
- struct rcu_head *next;
- void (*func)(struct rcu_head *head);
- };
-
+/* Internal to kernel, but needed by rcupreempt.h. */
+extern int rcu_scheduler_active;
+
#if defined(CONFIG_CLASSIC_RCU)
#include <linux/rcuclassic.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_TREE_RCU)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with Linus' tree
@ 2011-05-09 2:41 Stephen Rothwell
2011-05-09 15:39 ` Christoph Lameter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2011-05-09 2:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in mm/slub.c
between commit 30106b8ce2cc ("slub: Fix the lockless code on 32-bit
platforms with no 64-bit cmpxchg") from Linus' tree and commit
1759415e630e ("slub: Remove CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCAL ifdeffery") from the
slab tree.
Just context changes (maybe). I fixed it up (see below) and can carry
the fix as necessary.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
diff --cc mm/slub.c
index 9d2e5e4,461199f..0000000
--- a/mm/slub.c
+++ b/mm/slub.c
@@@ -1927,9 -1918,8 +1918,8 @@@ redo
object = __slab_alloc(s, gfpflags, node, addr, c);
else {
- #ifdef CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCAL
/*
- * The cmpxchg will only match if there was no additonal
+ * The cmpxchg will only match if there was no additional
* operation and if we are on the right processor.
*
* The cmpxchg does the following atomically (without lock semantics!)
@@@ -2144,8 -2103,7 +2103,7 @@@ redo
if (likely(page == c->page && c->node != NUMA_NO_NODE)) {
set_freepointer(s, object, c->freelist);
- #ifdef CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCAL
- if (unlikely(!this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(
+ if (unlikely(!irqsafe_cpu_cmpxchg_double(
s->cpu_slab->freelist, s->cpu_slab->tid,
c->freelist, tid,
object, next_tid(tid)))) {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with Linus' tree
2011-05-09 2:41 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2011-05-09 15:39 ` Christoph Lameter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Lameter @ 2011-05-09 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Pekka Enberg, linux-next, linux-kernel, Thomas Gleixner,
Ingo Molnar
On Mon, 9 May 2011, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Just context changes (maybe). I fixed it up (see below) and can carry
> the fix as necessary.
Looks okay.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with Linus' tree
@ 2024-06-03 2:33 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2024-06-03 2:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vlastimil Babka
Cc: Kees Cook, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 778 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in:
lib/fortify_kunit.c
between commit:
99a6087dfdc6 ("kunit/fortify: Remove __kmalloc_node() test")
from Linus' tree and commit:
a0a44d9175b3 ("mm, slab: don't wrap internal functions with alloc_hooks()")
from the slab tree.
I fixed it up (the latter includes the former, so I just used the latter)
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
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-06-03 2:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-03-05 5:18 linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-05-09 2:41 Stephen Rothwell
2011-05-09 15:39 ` Christoph Lameter
2024-06-03 2:33 Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox