linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc-fixes 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:00:02 +1100
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Cc:     linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the powerpc-fixes tree

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> writes:

> Hi Paul,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in:
>
>   arch/powerpc/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
>   f2574030b0e3 ("powerpc: Revert the initial stack protector support")
>
> from the powerpc-fixes tree and commit:
>
>   c7327406b3c3 ("rcu: Make arch select smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() strength")
>
> from the rcu 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.

Thanks.

One of these years I'm totally going to sort the selects under config
PPC :/

cheers