Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the printk tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 10:19:38 +1100

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:

  lib/test_printf.c

between commit:

  57f5677e535b ("printf: add support for printing symbolic error names")

from the printk tree and commit:

  f1ce39df508d ("lib/test_printf: Add tests for %pfw printk modifier")

from the pm 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 lib/test_printf.c
index 030daeb4fe21,422b847db424..000000000000
--- a/lib/test_printf.c
+++ b/lib/test_printf.c
@@@ -593,26 -595,35 +595,55 @@@ flags(void
  	kfree(cmp_buffer);
  }
  
+ static void __init fwnode_pointer(void)
+ {
+ 	const struct software_node softnodes[] = {
+ 		{ .name = "first", },
+ 		{ .name = "second", .parent = &softnodes[0], },
+ 		{ .name = "third", .parent = &softnodes[1], },
+ 		{ NULL /* Guardian */ }
+ 	};
+ 	const char * const full_name = "first/second/third";
+ 	const char * const full_name_second = "first/second";
+ 	const char * const second_name = "second";
+ 	const char * const third_name = "third";
+ 	int rval;
+ 
+ 	rval = software_node_register_nodes(softnodes);
+ 	if (rval) {
+ 		pr_warn("cannot register softnodes; rval %d\n", rval);
+ 		return;
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	test(full_name_second, "%pfw", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[1]));
+ 	test(full_name, "%pfw", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[2]));
+ 	test(full_name, "%pfwf", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[2]));
+ 	test(second_name, "%pfwP", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[1]));
+ 	test(third_name, "%pfwP", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[2]));
+ 
+ 	software_node_unregister_nodes(softnodes);
+ }
+ 
 +static void __init
 +errptr(void)
 +{
 +	test("-1234", "%pe", ERR_PTR(-1234));
 +
 +	/* Check that %pe with a non-ERR_PTR gets treated as ordinary %p. */
 +	BUILD_BUG_ON(IS_ERR(PTR));
 +	test_hashed("%pe", PTR);
 +
 +#ifdef CONFIG_SYMBOLIC_ERRNAME
 +	test("(-ENOTSOCK)", "(%pe)", ERR_PTR(-ENOTSOCK));
 +	test("(-EAGAIN)", "(%pe)", ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN));
 +	BUILD_BUG_ON(EAGAIN != EWOULDBLOCK);
 +	test("(-EAGAIN)", "(%pe)", ERR_PTR(-EWOULDBLOCK));
 +	test("[-EIO    ]", "[%-8pe]", ERR_PTR(-EIO));
 +	test("[    -EIO]", "[%8pe]", ERR_PTR(-EIO));
 +	test("-EPROBE_DEFER", "%pe", ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER));
 +#endif
 +}
 +
  static void __init
  test_pointer(void)
  {
@@@ -635,7 -646,7 +666,8 @@@
  	bitmap();
  	netdev_features();
  	flags();
 +	errptr();
+ 	fwnode_pointer();
  }
  
  static void __init selftest(void)