linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with Linus' 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:	Tue, 3 May 2016 14:03:41 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with Linus' tree

On 05/02/2016 10:25 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
>
>    drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>
> between commit:
>
>    9bf2b972afea ("NVMe: Fix reset/remove race")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
>    bb8d261e0888 ("nvme: introduce a controller state machine")
>
> from the block tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - 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.

There's a proper fixup in my for-next now, so you should be able to drop 
this one.

-- 
Jens Axboe