linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vhost tree with the tip 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 31 Dec 2015 12:25:00 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
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>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vhost tree with the tip tree

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 08:23:47PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the vhost tree got conflicts in:
> 
>   arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
>   arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
>   include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   d5a73cadf3fd ("lcoking/barriers, arch: Use smp barriers in smp_store_release()")
> 
> from the tip tree and commit:
> 
>   2683de3a1732 ("ia64: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h")
>   d78113bef3e0 ("powerpc: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h")
>   25bc870c914b ("s390: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h")
>   24888a057e97 ("asm-generic: add __smp_XXX wrappers")
> 
> from the vhost tree.

Thanks for letting me know.

I should probably cherry-pick d5a73cadf3fd - this will
make it appear twice in git history, but seems cleaner
than rebasing all of vhost on top of tip.

Is everyone fine with this?

Alternatively, I could submit the virt barriers + virtio patches for
inclusion in tip.

> I fixed it up (in each case taking the vhost tree version) and can
> carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
> 
> However, given the ongoing review and discussion, I do wonder if these
> vhost tree commits should be in linux-next yet.

So far I got comments from David Miller about the API naming, and I'd
like to get more feedback  - at least from Peter Zijlstra who gave me
the idea.  Otherwise this seems rather like a safe bet, and
this kind of integration issue seems like exactly the kind of thing
linux-next helps figure out.

> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/