Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 11:07:24 +1000

Hi all,

On Mon, 6 May 2019 14:01:47 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> 
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:58:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Leon,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code")
> > 
> > from the rdma tree and commit:
> > 
> >   c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device")
> > 
> > from the mlx5-next 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 drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000
> > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > @@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not
> >   
> >   	switch (event) {
> >   	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
> >  +		/* Should already be registered during the load */
> >  +		if (ibdev->is_rep)
> >  +			break;
> >   		write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> > - 		if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev)
> >  -		if (ibdev->rep) {
> >  -			struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch;
> >  -			struct net_device *rep_ndev;
> >  -
> >  -			rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw,
> >  -							  ibdev->rep->vport);
> >  -			if (rep_ndev == ndev)
> >  -				roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		} else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) {
> > ++		if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device)
> >   			roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		}
> >   		write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> >   		break;
> >     
> 
> This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

And now between the rdma tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell