linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:17:16 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux-Next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the powerpc tree with the m68k tree

Hi Stephen,

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:42 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> [forgot the conflict resolution ...]
>
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 09:27:20 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the powerpc tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   5b9bfb8ec467 ("m68k: mac: Use time64_t in RTC handling")
> >
> > from the m68k tree and commit:
> >
> >   ebd722275f9c ("macintosh/via-pmu: Replace via-pmu68k driver with via-pmu driver")
> >
> > from the powerpc 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.

Ah, now I remember Finn said he was going to rebase his series once the time64_t
patch has entered my tree...

> --- a/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> +++ b/arch/m68k/mac/misc.c
> @@@ -90,11 -85,11 +90,11 @@@ static void cuda_write_pram(int offset
>   }
>   #endif /* CONFIG_ADB_CUDA */
>
> - #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU68K
> + #ifdef CONFIG_ADB_PMU
>  -static long pmu_read_time(void)
>  +static time64_t pmu_read_time(void)
>   {
>         struct adb_request req;
>  -      long time;
>  +      time64_t time;
>
>         if (pmu_request(&req, NULL, 1, PMU_READ_RTC) < 0)
>                 return 0;

Thanks, looks good to me!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds