linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the modules tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 20 Jun 2015 10:55:15 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the modules tree

On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 06:35:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/linux/seqlock.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   7fc26327b756 ("seqlock: Introduce raw_read_seqcount_latch()")
> 
> from the modules tree and commit:
> 
>   c4bfa3f5f906 ("seqcount: Introduce raw_write_seqcount_barrier()")
> 
> from the tip tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).

Oh my that's unfortunate, those two patches just touching at the edge.
Resolution looks good.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/