netdev - linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the mm 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 12:16:05 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Alexei Starovoitov
 <ast@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton
 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux
 Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the mm tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:

  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/README.rst

between commit:

  0d57063bef1b ("selftests/bpf: update LLVM Phabricator links")

from the mm-nonmm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:

  f067074bafd5 ("selftests/bpf: Update LLVM Phabricator links")

from the bpf-next tree.

I fixed it up (the latter has one more digit in a SHA1 in a URL, so
I used that) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped