[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Subjectlinux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the s390 tree
Hi all,

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


between commit:

98ad45fb58c1 ("s390/checksum: coding style changes")

from the s390 tree and commit:

6e41c585e38f ("unify generic instances of csum_partial_copy_nocheck()")

from the vfs 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.

Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/s390/include/asm/checksum.h
index c401a5fd3ad2,6813bfa1eeb7..000000000000
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/checksum.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/checksum.h
@@@ -39,15 -39,8 +39,8 @@@ static inline __wsum csum_partial(cons
return sum;

- static inline __wsum csum_partial_copy_nocheck(const void *src, void *dst,
- int len, __wsum sum)
- {
- memcpy(dst, src, len);
- return csum_partial(dst, len, sum);
- }
- * Fold a partial checksum without adding pseudo headers
+ * Fold a partial checksum without adding pseudo headers.
static inline __sum16 csum_fold(__wsum sum)
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-08 03:30    [W:0.043 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site