linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with the jc

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:   Thu, 22 Mar 2018 09:41:17 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Changbin Du <changbin.du@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with the jc_docs
 tree

On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 09:21:08 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> > I can repost the whole thing as v10, or whatever makes sense here.  
> 
> Thanks, I assume that they apply on top of the jc_docs tree as well
> (git://git.lwn.net/linux.git#docs-next).  If so, then I can use them as
> merge resolutions, or Steve can rebase his tree (minus your old
> patches) on top of the (hopefully unchanging) jc_docs tree and then he
> could apply your patches there.

Too late for a rebase. I've already run it through my tests and posted,
I don't rebase anything that goes to linux-next unless there's a really
good reason to do so. I don't think this is one.

I'll just make sure Linus knows about it and have a link to point to
the proper end results. He's stated he's fine with those kinds of
solutions. And since this is only a documentation conflict, we don't
need to worry about mistakes causing subtle behavior with the kernel.

-- Steve