linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:27:42 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with Linus' tree

Hi Catalin,

Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in:

  arch/arm64/kernel/head.S

between commit:

  fd363bd417dd ("arm64: avoid TLB conflict with CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  3c5e9f238bc4 ("arm64: head.S: move KASLR processing out of __enable_mmu()")

from the arm64 tree.

I fixed it up (the latter included the former change, so I just used that)
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