linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net tree

2017-02-09 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Andrew,

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

  drivers/net/usb/sierra_net.c

between commit:

  5a70348e1187 ("sierra_net: Add support for IPv6 and Dual-Stack Link Sense 
Indications")

from the net tree and patch:

  "lib/vsprintf.c: remove %Z support"

from the akpm 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/net/usb/sierra_net.c
index d9440bc022f2,88ace5024306..
--- a/drivers/net/usb/sierra_net.c
+++ b/drivers/net/usb/sierra_net.c
@@@ -376,11 -349,11 +376,11 @@@ static inline int sierra_net_is_valid_a
  static int sierra_net_parse_lsi(struct usbnet *dev, char *data, int datalen)
  {
struct lsi_umts *lsi = (struct lsi_umts *)data;
 +  u32 expected_length;
  
 -  if (datalen < sizeof(struct lsi_umts)) {
 -  netdev_err(dev->net, "%s: Data length %d, exp %zu\n",
 -  __func__, datalen,
 -  sizeof(struct lsi_umts));
 +  if (datalen < sizeof(struct lsi_umts_single)) {
-   netdev_err(dev->net, "%s: Data length %d, exp >= %Zu\n",
++  netdev_err(dev->net, "%s: Data length %d, exp >= %zu\n",
 + __func__, datalen, sizeof(struct lsi_umts_single));
return -1;
}
  


linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net tree

2016-10-13 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Andrew,

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

  include/linux/mlx5/device.h

between commit:

  b8a4ddb2e8f4 ("net/mlx5: Add MLX5_ARRAY_SET64 to fix BUILD_BUG_ON")

from the net tree and patch:

  "include/linux/mlx5/device.h: kill BUILD_BUG_ON()s"

from the akpm tree.

I fixed it up (I just dropped the akpm tree patch for today) 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