linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the tty 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:   Mon, 5 Jun 2017 08:50:03 +0200
From:   Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@...il.com>,
        Alan Cox <alan@...yncelyn.cymru>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the tty tree

On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:57:49PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/uapi/linux/tty.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   8a8dabf2dd68 ("tty: handle the case where we cannot restore a line discipline")
> 
> from the tty tree and commit:
> 
>   1ab92da32e37 ("staging: speakup: add tty-based comms functions")
> 
> from the staging tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I used the tty tree version) 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.

I'm the maintainer of both, I knew this would happen and made it so it
was obvious what version to take :)

thanks,

greg k-h