linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] please pull file locking changes for 3.15

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: <20140407071130.672d7e8e@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
Date:	Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:11:30 -0400
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] please pull file locking changes for 3.15

On Mon, 7 Apr 2014 11:37:06 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Jeff,
> 
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 20:56:24 -0400 Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback and for pulling this in anyway. I'll make sure
> > to do all of that on subsequent pull requests.
> 
> Also, please don't rebase what you have in linux-next before sending it to
> Linus (without good reason).  Especially if you then leave the linux-next
> included branch as it was - since that may cause conflicts in my tree
> (and so I notice the rebase).
> 

I don't think I did that though, did I? Both the branches I had in this
case were based on 3.13-rc1.

Now that Linus has pulled in the changes, am I OK to rebase the
branches (or do a pull)?

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)