Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the mm tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 2:30 PM Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:04:22 +1100
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   mm/page_owner.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   a5bc091881fd ("mm: page_owner: use new iteration API")
> >
> > from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
> >
> >   8c57b687e833 ("mm, bpf: Introduce free_pages_nolock()")
> >
> > from the bpf-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.
> >
>
> This looks good to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@xxxxxxxxxx>

Looks good to me as well.
Thanks