linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the signal 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20120702161200.10c26ba2b57f9c7e493e85cc@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Mon, 2 Jul 2012 16:12:00 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@...driver.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the signal tree with Linus' tree

Hi Al,

Today's linux-next merge of the signal tree got a conflict in
arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S between commit c58ce2b1e3c7 ("ppc64: fix
missing to check all bits of _TIF_USER_WORK_MASK in preempt") from Linus'
tree and commit d07644a97726 ("powerpc: missing NOTIFY_RESUME check on
64bit if CONFIG_PREEMPT is set") from the signal tree.

I *think* that the former is a superset of the latter, so I just used the
former.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped