Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the arm-soc tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 09:48:07 +1000

Hi All,

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:06:57 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> 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 <[email-masked]>
> 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 <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  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.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell