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  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, 20 Mar 2014 14:09:33 -0300
From:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@...sung.com>
To:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Cc:	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the  tree

Em Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:44:01 +0000
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca> escreveu:

> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 10:17:56 +0100, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> > 
> > On Thursday 13 March 2014 00:50:26 Mark Brown wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in
> > > drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-of.c between commit b9db140c1e4644d
> > > ("[media] v4l: of: Support empty port nodes") from the v4l tree and
> > > commit fd9fdb78a9bf ("[media] of: move graph helpers from
> > > drivers/media/v4l2-core to drivers/of") from the staging tree.
> > > 
> > > I fixed it up by essentially dropping the support for empty port nodes
> > > since there were more context differences than I was comfortable with
> > > in the changes in the new code.
> > 
> > If I'm not mistaken the move of drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-of.c to 
> > drivers/of/of-graph.c has been canceled for v3.15 and related patches should 
> > be dropped from the for-next branches in the very near future (the v4l tree 
> > has already been rebased).
> 
> I had not actually asked Mauro to revert,

See:
	https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/10/283

There, you literally answered me that:
	"All trees containing the branch would need to be reverted."
and:
	"It means any tree containing that branch *must* be rewound."

That's what I (unhappily) did.

I won't reapply this series, but, instead, I'll simply wait for the
staging tree to be merged before sending those patches upstream,
before sending the topic branch with exynos 5 patches that depend on it.

This way, I can add Stephen patch on such topic branch, to avoid
compilation breakages after merged.

> but the branch is still in rmk's
> tree and linux-next. I do not think it needs to be cancelled.

> I do still have issues about it as a generic pattern, but I'm happy with
> the discussion so far and the documentation will be sorted before the
> next kernel is released.
> 
> g.

Regards,
Mauro
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists