linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core 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]

Message-ID: <20140312200232.GA22332@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:02:32 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Stewart Smith <stewart@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 06:59:56AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Either that or I can put a copy of the patch that introduces the new
> function in my tree as long as it's a single patch. The resulting
> conflict should resolve trivially and Linus should be fine if
> appropriate explanations are provided (though I would have preferred
> pulling in a topic branch).

An alternative that I personally prefer to resolve conflicts like this
is to pull driver-core-next into the broken tree and resolve it there.
It's highly likely that the pending changes are gonna be included in
the next merge window.  If contaminating the merge history is a
concern, it can live in a separate branch which is pulled into
for-next.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/