linux-kernel - Re: 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>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:59:36 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:22:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   096622104e14 ("arm64: fpsimd: Prevent registers leaking across exec")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   cb84d11e1625 ("arm64: neon: Remove support for nested or hardirq kernel-mode NEON")
> 
> from the arm64 tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just used the latter 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.

Just a reminder that the above conflict still exists.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell