Re: linux-next: manual merge of the char-misc tree with Linus' tree

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

Hi Kalle, 

On 28 August 2021 12:57:27 PM IST, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 11:28:52PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>> Hi Greg,
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 04:49:04PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> > > Hi all,
>>> > > 
>>> > > Today's linux-next merge of the char-misc tree got conflicts in:
>>> > > 
>>> > >   drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> > >   net/qrtr/mhi.c
>>> > > 
>>> > > between commit:
>>> > > 
>>> > >   9ebc2758d0bb ("Revert "net: really fix the build..."")
>>> > > 
>>> > > from the origin tree and commit:
>>> > > 
>>> > >   0092a1e3f763 ("bus: mhi: Add inbound buffers allocation flag")
>>> > > 
>>> > > from the char-misc tree.
>>> > > 
>>> > > I fixed it up (the commit in Linus' tree is basically a revert of the
>>> > > char-misc tree, so I effectively reverted 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.
>>> > 
>>> > Hm, what should I do in my tree here?
>>> > 
>>> > Kalle, what commit should I make in the char-misc tree now to handle
>>> > this issue, and make the merge with Linus's tree "simple"?  Or any other
>>> > ideas?
>>> > 
>>> 
>>> For making the merge simpler, I'd suggest we revert below commit in char-misc:
>>> 
>>> 0092a1e3f763 ("bus: mhi: Add inbound buffers allocation flag")
>>
>> Reverting that works for me, I've done that in my tree and that allows
>> it to be merged cleanly with Linus's tree.
>
>Unfortunately this now breaks the build in char-misc-next (commit
>0dc3ad3f859d):
>

You need to revert ce78ffa3ef16 and that's already done in net-next. So once current net-next and char-misc-next reaches linus tree everything should be fine. 

I forgot to mention that the testing should be done with both char-misc-next and net-next or in linux-next. 

Is it mandatory to make it work with char-misc alone? In usual case I know it is mandatory but I thought with current situation it should be fine. 

Thanks, 
Mani

>net/qrtr/mhi.c: In function 'qcom_mhi_qrtr_probe':
>net/qrtr/mhi.c:105:48: error: 'MHI_CH_INBOUND_ALLOC_BUFS' undeclared (first use in this function)
>  105 |         rc = mhi_prepare_for_transfer(mhi_dev, MHI_CH_INBOUND_ALLOC_BUFS);
>      |                                                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>net/qrtr/mhi.c:105:48: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>net/qrtr/mhi.c:105:14: error: too many arguments to function 'mhi_prepare_for_transfer'
>  105 |         rc = mhi_prepare_for_transfer(mhi_dev, MHI_CH_INBOUND_ALLOC_BUFS);
>      |              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>In file included from net/qrtr/mhi.c:6:
>./include/linux/mhi.h:725:5: note: declared here
>  725 | int mhi_prepare_for_transfer(struct mhi_device *mhi_dev);
>      |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>To see this error make sure CONFIG_QRTR and CONFIG_QRTR_MHI are enabled.
>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.