Re: [Xen-devel] linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the xen-tip tree

[Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 19:02:10 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/xen/gntdev.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   1d3145675538 ("xen/gntdev: Make private routines/structures accessible")
> 
> from the xen-tip tree and commit:
> 
>   aaefcabe9c25 ("mm, oom: distinguish blockable mode for mmu notifiers")
> 
> from the akpm-current 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/xen/gntdev.c
> index c866a62f766d,55b4f0e3f4d6..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/xen/gntdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/gntdev.c
> @@@ -479,7 -441,20 +479,20 @@@ static const struct vm_operations_struc
>   
>   /* ------------------------------------------------------------------ */
>   
>  -static bool in_range(struct grant_map *map,
> ++static bool in_range(struct gntdev_grant_map *map,
> +                           unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> + {
> +     if (!map->vma)
> +             return false;
> +     if (map->vma->vm_start >= end)
> +             return false;
> +     if (map->vma->vm_end <= start)
> +             return false;
> + 
> +     return true;
> + }
> + 
>  -static void unmap_if_in_range(struct grant_map *map,
>  +static void unmap_if_in_range(struct gntdev_grant_map *map,
>                             unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>   {
>       unsigned long mstart, mend;
> @@@ -503,15 -472,26 +510,26 @@@
>       WARN_ON(err);
>   }
>   
> - static void mn_invl_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
> + static int mn_invl_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
>                               struct mm_struct *mm,
> -                             unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> +                             unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> +                             bool blockable)
>   {
>       struct gntdev_priv *priv = container_of(mn, struct gntdev_priv, mn);
>  -    struct grant_map *map;
>  +    struct gntdev_grant_map *map;
> +     int ret = 0;
> + 
> +     /* TODO do we really need a mutex here? */
> +     if (blockable)
> +             mutex_lock(&priv->lock);
> +     else if (!mutex_trylock(&priv->lock))
> +             return -EAGAIN;
>   
> -     mutex_lock(&priv->lock);
>       list_for_each_entry(map, &priv->maps, next) {
> +             if (in_range(map, start, end)) {
> +                     ret = -EAGAIN;
> +                     goto out_unlock;
> +             }
>               unmap_if_in_range(map, start, end);
>       }
>       list_for_each_entry(map, &priv->freeable_maps, next) {

This is now a conflict between Linus' tree and the akpm-current tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpvBh5PFQO1p.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel