linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:38:33 -0400
From:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
To:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc
 tree

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 02:09:00PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> it's this commit:
> 
> commit 89602312c5755c87a5ca6ba8ef6b0fce9d510951
> Merge: a0cec78 f23afe2
> Author:     Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
> AuthorDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
> Commit:     Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
> CommitDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
> 
>     Merge remote-tracking branch 'arm-soc/for-next' into mvebu/drivers
> 

grmbl... Yep, that's my mistake.  I usually do a temp branch for
merge-testing against arm-soc/for-next and building.  Apparently I
forgot to make the branch first.  My apologies.

I've fixed up mvebu/drivers, and I'm build testing a rebuilt for-next
now.

> You merged back the for-next branch from arm-soc into your tree. Big no-no.

Yep, \shame/.

> This brings up the subject of subplatform trees and conflicts and
> -next. I wonder if we should ask Stephen to put all these trees in a
> category where if they have any substantial conflicts or weirdness
> like this, that he just drops it for the current -next build instead
> of spending effort on them.

Agreed.  A tree hierarchy of sorts.  mvebu and other sub-arch trees
should definitely be dropped for the day with minimal investigation.

thx,

Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/